...
首页> 外文期刊>Pediatric diabetes. >Intensive vs. conventional insulin management initiated at diagnosis in children with diabetes: should payer source influence the choice of therapy?
【24h】

Intensive vs. conventional insulin management initiated at diagnosis in children with diabetes: should payer source influence the choice of therapy?

机译:在糖尿病儿童的诊断中开始强化胰岛素治疗与常规胰岛素管理:付款人来源是否会影响治疗选择?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Intensive insulin management (IIM) in type 1 diabetes facilitates improved glycemic control and a reduction in long-term diabetes complications. We hypothesized that IIM can be started at diagnosis without deleterious effects on hemoglobin A1c (A1c), body mass index (BMI), and severe hypoglycemia regardless of payer source. Type 1 diabetes patients aged 0-18 yrs, in an academic endocrinology practice were identified for a retrospective chart review. Fifty-four patients on conventional insulin management (CIM) were compared to 51 on IIM. Insulin regimens, payer, and A1c values were compared at baseline, 12, 15, and 18 months. Secondary analyses included BMI changes and hypoglycemia frequency. Overall mean A1c values for the IIM group (8.15 +/- 1.41) were lower across all time periods compared to the CIM group (8.57 +/- 1.52). Repeated measures anova revealed a significant treatment group effect (p = 0.01) with no time effect (p = 0.87) or interaction (group by time) effect (p = 0.65). Private insurance patients had lower mean A1C values than Medicaid patients (chi(2) = 4.5186, p < 0.05), regardless of regimen. A1c values between IIM and CIM were not statistically different within the Medicaid group. BMI changes between groups were not different. Chi-square analysis for severe hypoglycemia revealed no group differences. In conclusion, IIM had improved glycemic control. Private insurance vs. Medicaid patients had lower mean A1c values regardless of treatment group. Considering Medicaid patients only, IIM was not inferior, and for those with private insurance, IIM was superior. IIM, initiated at diagnosis, is a reasonable approach for newly diagnosed children with diabetes regardless of payer source.
机译:1型糖尿病的强化胰岛素管理(IIM)有助于改善血糖控制并减少长期糖尿病并发症。我们假设IIM可以在诊断时开始,而对血红蛋白A1c(A1c),体重指数(BMI)和严重的低血糖无有害影响,而与付款人的来源无关。在学术内分泌学实践中,确定了0-18岁的1型糖尿病患者,以进行回顾性图表审查。将54例接受常规胰岛素治疗(CIM)的患者与51例接受IIM的患者进行比较。在基线,第12、15和18个月时比较了胰岛素治疗方案,付款人和A1c值。次要分析包括BMI变化和低血糖频率。与CIM组(8.57 +/- 1.52)相比,IIM组的总体平均A1c值(8.15 +/- 1.41)在所有时间段均较低。重复测量方差分析显示治疗组效果显着(p = 0.01),无时间效应(p = 0.87)或相互作用(时间分组)(p = 0.65)。无论采用何种方案,私人保险患者的平均A1C值均低于医疗补助患者(chi(2)= 4.5186,p <0.05)。 Medicaid组中IIM和CIM之间的A1c值在统计学上没有差异。两组之间的BMI变化没有差异。严重低血糖的卡方分析未发现组间差异。总之,IIM改善了血糖控制。无论治疗组如何,私人保险与医疗补助患者的平均A1c值均较低。仅考虑医疗补助患者,IIM并不逊色,对于有私人保险的患者,IIM更为出色。 IIM是在诊断时启动的,不管付款人的来源如何,对于新诊断的糖尿病儿童都是一种合理的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号