Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2026
Diabetes Distress in Caregivers of Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Georges Elena D, Parimi Neha, Dimentstein Karen, Brown Elizabeth A, Wolf Risa M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The American Diabetes Association recommends screening for diabetes distress in individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. We evaluated the clinical utility of the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) distress screener in caregivers of young children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and examined associations between diabetes distress, demographic and clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use.
METHODS: In this prospective survey study, caregivers of children with T1DM aged <8 years completed the PAID-PR during multidisciplinary diabetes clinic visits. The PAID-PR scores and clinical data were collected. Associations between diabetes distress, clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use were assessed using the Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, and 2-sample t tests. Distress related to theoretical vs immediate burdens was compared using paired t tests.
RESULTS: Thirty caregivers (73.3% mothers) of children with T1DM (mean age [SD] = 5.4y [1.9], 70% non-Hispanic White, 60% commercially insured) completed the PAID-PR. Child median diabetes duration was 1.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.6, 2.3), median HbA1c 7.6% (IQR = 6.9, 8.1). All children used continuous glucose monitors, 73.3% Omnipod 5, 6.7% Tandem Mobi, and 20% multiple daily injections. The median distress score was 30.6/100 (IQR = 22.2, 36.1; the lowest 75th percentile of distress = 24.3 [12.5, 31.9]; the highest 25th percentile = 42.9 [38.6, 52.8]). Scores did not differ by demographics, clinical characteristics, or diabetes technology use. Caregivers indicated significantly greater distress from theoretical vs immediate burdens (P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers of young children with T1DM experience greater distress related to anticipated future (theoretical) burdens than with immediate diabetes management. Understanding these distress patterns can help guide psychosocial supports.
METHODS: In this prospective survey study, caregivers of children with T1DM aged <8 years completed the PAID-PR during multidisciplinary diabetes clinic visits. The PAID-PR scores and clinical data were collected. Associations between diabetes distress, clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use were assessed using the Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, and 2-sample t tests. Distress related to theoretical vs immediate burdens was compared using paired t tests.
RESULTS: Thirty caregivers (73.3% mothers) of children with T1DM (mean age [SD] = 5.4y [1.9], 70% non-Hispanic White, 60% commercially insured) completed the PAID-PR. Child median diabetes duration was 1.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.6, 2.3), median HbA1c 7.6% (IQR = 6.9, 8.1). All children used continuous glucose monitors, 73.3% Omnipod 5, 6.7% Tandem Mobi, and 20% multiple daily injections. The median distress score was 30.6/100 (IQR = 22.2, 36.1; the lowest 75th percentile of distress = 24.3 [12.5, 31.9]; the highest 25th percentile = 42.9 [38.6, 52.8]). Scores did not differ by demographics, clinical characteristics, or diabetes technology use. Caregivers indicated significantly greater distress from theoretical vs immediate burdens (P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers of young children with T1DM experience greater distress related to anticipated future (theoretical) burdens than with immediate diabetes management. Understanding these distress patterns can help guide psychosocial supports.