Glycaemic Control Among People with Type 1 Diabetes During Lockdown for the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak in Italy

Benedetta Maria Bonora, Federico Boscari, Angelo Avogaro, Daniela Bruttomesso, Gian Paolo Fadini, Benedetta Maria Bonora, Federico Boscari, Angelo Avogaro, Daniela Bruttomesso, Gian Paolo Fadini

Abstract

Introduction: In late February 2020, due to the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the Italian Government closed down all educational and sport activities. In March, it introduced further measures to stop the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), placing the country in a state of almost complete lockdown. We report the impact of these restrictions on glucose control among people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

Methods: Data were collected on 33 individuals with T1D who were monitoring their glucose levels using a flash glucose monitoring device and remotely connected to the diabetes clinic on a cloud platform. We retrieved information on average glucose, standard deviation and percentage time in hypoglycaemia (< 70 mg/dl), glucose range (70-180 mg/dl) and hyperglycaemia (> 180 mg/dl). We compared glycaemic measures collected during lockdown to those collected before the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic and to the periods immediately before lockdown.

Results: In 20 patients who had stopped working and were at home as a result of the lockdown, overall glycaemic control improved during the first 7 days of the lockdown as compared to the weeks before the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Average glucose declined from 177 ± 45 mg/dl (week before lockdown) to 160 ± 40 mg/dl (lockdown; p = 0.005) and the standard deviation improved significantly. Time in range increased from 54.4 to 65.2% (p = 0.010), and time in hyperglycaemia decreased from 42.3 to 31.6% (p = 0.016). The number of scans per day remained unchanged. In 13 patients who continued working, none of the measures of glycaemic control changed during lockdown.

Conclusion: Despite the limited possibility to exercise and the incumbent psychologic stress, glycaemic control improved in patients with T1D who stopped working during the lockdown, suggesting that slowing down routine daily activities can have beneficial effects on T1D management, at least in the short term.

Keywords: COVID-19; Education; Epidemic; Sensor; Telemedicine.

© The Author(s) 2020.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Changes in glucose control parameters during lockdown. a Timeline of restriction measures. ‘Before’ refers to 1 week before the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak in Italy; ‘Period 1’ refers to the time from the closure of all sport and educational activities to lockdown of the Padova area; ‘Period 2’ refers to the first week after lockdown. Panels bd refer to patients who stayed at home (i.e. stopped working); panels eg refer to patients who continued working. b, e Box and whisker plots showing changes in average glucose levels of individual patients (lines), with the horizontal line in box indicating the median, the top and bottom of the box indicating the upper and lower quartiles, respectively, and the whiskers indicating range/variability. c, f Change in the two groups of patients in terms of average glucose versus standard deviation (SD) plot. As per convention, cutoffs (dotted lines) are drawn at an average glucose of 150 mg/dl and a SD of 50 mg/dl to define high/low and stable/unstable control, respectively. d, g Percentage time in hypoglycaemia (Hypo; < 70 mg/dl), range (70–180 mg/dl) and hyperglycaemia (Hyper; > 180 mg/dl) in each group. Asterisk (*) indicates significant difference at p < 0.05 between period 2 and before the outbreak.

References

    1. Hilliard ME, Harris MA, Weissberg-Benchell J. Diabetes resilience: a model of risk and protection in type 1 diabetes. Curr Diab Rep. 2012;12:739–748. doi: 10.1007/s11892-012-0314-3.
    1. Guo J, Whittemore R, He GP. The relationship between diabetes self-management and metabolic control in youth with type 1 diabetes: an integrative review. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67:2294–2310. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05697.x.
    1. Svedbo Engstrom M, Leksell J, Johansson UB, et al. Health-related quality of life and glycaemic control among adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes—a nationwide cross-sectional study. Health Qual Life Out. 2019;17:141. doi: 10.1186/s12955-019-1212-z.
    1. Hansen UM, Skinner T, Olesen K, Willaing I. Diabetes distress, intentional hyperglycemia at work, and glycemic control among workers with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2019;42:797–803. doi: 10.2337/dc18-1426.
    1. Contreras I, Quiros C, Gimenez M, Conget I, Vehi J. Profiling intra-patient type I diabetes behaviors. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2016;136:131–141. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.08.022.
    1. Landau Z, Lebenthal Y, Boaz M, Pinhas-Hamiel O. Observational study of diabetes management in type 1 diabetic school-age children during holiday versus school days. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2013;26:1083–1086.
    1. Mooney JA, Helms PJ, Jolliffe IT, Smail P. Seasonality of type 1 diabetes mellitus in children and its modification by weekends and holidays: retrospective observational study. Arch Dis Child. 2004;89:970–973. doi: 10.1136/adc.2003.040865.
    1. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:727–733. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017.
    1. John Hopkins University of Medicine Coronavirus Resource Center. . Accessed 13 Mar 2020.
    1. Lazzerini M, Putoto G. COVID-19 in Italy: momentous decisions and many uncertainties. Lancet Glob Health. 2020 doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30110-8.
    1. 2020 Coronavirus pandemic in Italy. . Accessed April 2020.
    1. Rosenbaum L. The untold toll the pandemic's effects on patients without Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 doi: 10.1056/NEJMms2009984.
    1. Bruttomesso D, Laviola L, Avogaro A, et al. The use of real time continuous glucose monitoring or flash glucose monitoring in the management of diabetes: a consensus view of Italian diabetes experts using the Delphi method. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2019;29:421–431. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2019.01.018.
    1. Bakhach M, Reid MW, Pyatak EA, et al. Home telemedicine (CoYoT1 Clinic): a novel approach to improve psychosocial outcomes in young adults with diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2019;45:420–430. doi: 10.1177/0145721719858080.
    1. Evans M, Welsh Z, Ells S, Seibold A. The impact of flash glucose monitoring on glycaemic control as measured by HbA1c: a meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world observational studies. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11:83–95. doi: 10.1007/s13300-019-00720-0.
    1. Bolinder J, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, Kroger J, Weitgasser R. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2254–2263. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31535-5.
    1. Oskarsson P, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, Krӧger J, Weitgasser R, Bolinder J. Impact of flash glucose monitoring on hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes managed with multiple daily injection therapy: a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the IMPACT randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2018;61:539–550. doi: 10.1007/s00125-017-4527-5.
    1. American Diabetes Association Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43:S14–31. doi: 10.2337/dc20-S002.
    1. Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH, et al. A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:604–612. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-150-9-200905050-00006.
    1. Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al. Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care. 2019;42:1593–1603. doi: 10.2337/dci19-0028.
    1. Danne T, Nimri R, Battelino T, et al. International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1631–1640. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1600.
    1. Wang C, Horby PW, Hayden FG, Gao GF. A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern. Lancet. 2020;395:470–473. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30185-9.
    1. Maddaloni E, Buzzetti R. Covid-19 and diabetes mellitus: unveiling the interaction of two pandemics. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3321.
    1. Gupta R, Ghosh A, Singh AK, Misra A. Clinical considerations for patients with diabetes in times of COVID-19 epidemic. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2020;14:211–212. doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2020.03.002.
    1. Iacobucci G. Covid-19: diabetes clinicians set up social media account to help alleviate patients' fears. BMJ. 2020;368:m1262. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1262.
    1. Annor FB, Roblin DW, Okosun IS, Goodman M. Work-related psychosocial stress and glycemic control among working adults with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2015;9:85–90. doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2015.02.003.
    1. Guo W, Li M, Dong Y, et al. Diabetes is a risk factor for the progression and prognosis of COVID-19. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3319.
    1. Fadini GP, Morieri ML, Longato E, Avogaro A. Prevalence and impact of diabetes among people infected with SARS-CoV-2. J Endocrinol Invest. 2020 doi: 10.1007/s40618-020-01236-2.
    1. Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD). Evaluation of diabetes healthcare quality indicators in Italy. AMD Annals 2010. Naples: Idelson-Gnocchi; 2018. 10.2147/CEOR.S240183.
    1. Halbron M, Bourron O, Andreelli F, et al. Insulin pump combined with flash glucose monitoring: a therapeutic option to improve glycemic control in severely nonadherent patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21:409–412. doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0041.
    1. Al Hayek AA, Robert AA, Al Dawish MA. Effectiveness of the freestyle libre flash glucose monitoring system on diabetes distress among individuals with type 1 diabetes: a prospective study. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11:927–937. doi: 10.1007/s13300-020-00793-2.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren