Aim The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of a prospectively conducted interactive 5-day education programme based on Düsseldorf model on glycated haemoglobin (A1C), and total daily dose of insulin in type 1 diabetes patients. Methods A total of 67 type 1 diabetes patients was analysed; mean age of 11±0.68 years, 43 females and 24 males. The programme was led by a trained team of diabetes specialist doctors and nurses. All subjects and their parents completed a knowledge test about diabetes at beginning, and at the end of education, and after 12 months (30 questions). Subjects were evaluated for total daily insulin, and HbA1c at baseline, as well as 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after the end of the education programme. Results Results of the knowledge test after the education have shown higher knowledge at baseline. At the end of the education programme an average of total daily insulin dose was significantly lower. There was a 3.17% reduction in HbA1c values over 9 months, and 1.8% over 12 months in the comparison to the baseline values (p<0.001). Conclusions Structured education programme of functional insulin therapy was associated with improved glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes patients and their parents. It motivated patients and parents to improve glycaemic control. One year after the follow up, glycaemic control was worsening, due to lack of patients' motivation, therefore, there is a need for yearly re-education.
Watkins R, Evans-Molina C, Blum J, Dimeglio L. Established and emerging biomarkers for the prediction of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review. Transl Res. 2014. p. 110–21.
2.
Dunbar J. The RCPE UK Consensus Statement on Diabetes. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2010. p. 283.
3.
Sacks D, Arnold M, Bakris G, Bruns D, Horvath A, Kirkman S, et al. Guidelines and recommendation for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2011. p. 1419–23.
4.
Haas L, Maryniuk M, Beck J, Cox C, Duker P, Edwards L, et al. National standards for diabetes self management education and support. Diabetes Care. 2012. p. 144–53.
5.
Funnell M, Brown T, Childs B, Haas L, Hosey G, Jensen B, et al. National standards for diabetes self-management education. Diabetes Care. 2007. p. 1630–7.
6.
Gerich J, Odawara M, Terauchi Y. The rationale for paired pre-and postprandial self-monitoring of blood glucose: the role of glycemic variability in micro-and macrovascular risk. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007. p. 1791–8.
7.
Franklin V, Waller A, Pagliari C, Greene S. A randomized controlled trial of Sweet Talk, a text-messaging system to support young people with diabetes. Diabetic Med. 2006. p. 1332–45.
8.
Svoren B, Volkening L, Butler D, Moreland, Ec, Anderson B, et al. Temporal trends in the treatment of pediatric type 1 diabetes and impact on acute outcomes. J Pediatr. 2007. p. 660–1.
9.
Clinical practice recommendations. Diabetes Care. American Diabetes Association; 2014.
10.
Murphy H, Rayman G, Skinner T. Psycho-educational interventions for children and young people with Type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Med. 2006. p. 935–43.
11.
The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993. p. 977–86.
12.
Effect of intensive diabetes treatment on the development and progression of long-term complications in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. J Pediatr. 1994. p. 177–88.
13.
De Beaufort C;, Swift P, Skinner C, Aanstoot H, Aman J, Cameron F, et al. Continuing stability of center differences in pediatric diabetes care: do advances in diabetes treatment improve outcome? The Hvidore Study Group on childhood diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007. p. 2245–50.
14.
Johnson S, Cooper M, Jones T, Davis E. Long-term outcome of insulin pump therapy in children with type 1 diabetes assessed in a large population-based case-control study. Diabetologia. 2013. p. 2392–400.
15.
Downie E, Craig M, Hing S, Cusumano J, Chan A, Donaghue K. Continued reduction in the prevalence of retinopathy in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: role of insulin therapy and glycemic control. Diabetes Care. 2011. p. 2368–73.
16.
Haller M, Stalvey M, Silverstein J. Predictors of control of diabetes: monitoring may be the key. J Pediatr. 2004. p. 660–1.
17.
Cameron F, De Beaufort C, Aanstoot H, Hoey H, Lange K, Castano L, et al. Lessons from the Hvidoere International Study Group on childhood diabetes: be dogmatic about outcome and flexible in approach. Pediatr Diabetes. 2013. p. 473–80.
18.
Diana Štimjanin-Koldžo. p. 1.
19.
Služba za dječije bolesti, 2 Odjeljenje za endokrinologiju, dijabetes i bolesti metabolizma; Kantonalna bolnica Zenica.
20.
Svi praćeni pacijenti i njihovi roditelji pristupili su testu znanja od 30 pitanja na početku programa, na kraju petodnevne edukacije te na kraju praćenja tokom 12 mjeseci. Pacijenti i njihovi roditelji pratili su ukupnu dnevnu dozu inzulina, HbA1c na početku edukacije te nakon 3, 6, 9 i 12 mjeseci po edukativnom programu. motivacija opada, što je registrirano pogoršanjem glikoregulacije, potrebna je reedukacija.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
,
