Original ArticleContinuous subcutaneous insulin infusion vs. multiple daily injections in children with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trialsPań kowska E, B1azik M, Dziechciarz P, Szypowska A, Szajewska H. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion vs. multiple daily injections in children with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Pediatric Diabetes 2009: 10: 52-58.Objective: To investigate potential effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) compared with multiple daily injections (MDI) on glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Study design: Meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control studies (RCTs). The electronic databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched through October 2007. Results: Six RCTs involving 165 participants with T1DM met our predefined inclusion criteria. Combined data from all trials showed that the CSII group compared with the MDI group experienced a significant reduction in the level of glycosylated hemoglobin. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) was 20.24% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 20.41 to 20.07, p , 0.001] with a fixed model and remained significant in the random effect model. This effect was reached by slightly decreasing insulin requirement [three RCTs, n ¼ 74, WMD 20.22 IU/kg/d (95% CI 20.31 to 20.14, p , 0.001)]. No differences in the incidences of ketoacidosis and severe hypoglycemic events were found. Conclusions: In short-term insulin therapy, CSII compared with MDI is a more effective form of metabolic control and allows reducing the daily insulin requirement. Yet, no conclusions have been made so far whether this effect holds in later years. These results should be approached with caution because of the methodological limitations of the analyzed studies.

No abstract

Background Intensified insulin delivery using multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is recommended in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to achieve good metabolic control. Objective To examine the frequency of pump usage in T1D children treated in SWEET (Better control in Paediatric and Adolescent diabeteS: Working to crEate CEnTers of Reference) centers and to compare metabolic control between patients treated with CSII vs MDI. Methods This study included 16 570 T1D children participating in the SWEET prospective, multicenter, standardized diabetes patient registry. Datasets were aggregated over the most recent year of treatment for each patient. Data were collected until March 2016. To assess the organization of pump therapy a survey was carried out. Results Overall, 44.4% of T1D children were treated with CSII. The proportion of patients with pump usage varied between centers and decreased with increasing age compared with children treated with MDI. In a logistic regression analysis adjusting for age, gender and diabetes duration, the use of pump was associated with both: center size [odd ratio 1.51 (1.47‐1.55), P < .0001) and the diabetes‐related expenditure per capita [odd ratio 1.55 (1.49‐1.61), P < .0001]. Linear regression analysis, adjusted for age, gender, and diabetes duration showed that both HbA1c and daily insulin dose (U/kg/d) remained decreased in children treated with CSII compared to MDI (P < .0001). Conclusions Insulin pump therapy is offered by most Sweet centers. The differences between centers affect the frequency of use of modern technology. Despite the heterogeneity of centers, T1D children achieve relatively good metabolic control, especially those treated with insulin pumps and those of younger age.

Patients using at least one D-W/S-W bolus per day achieved a recommended level of HbA1c. Paediatric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus were found to be able to apply D-W/S-W boluses in daily self-treatment process based on food counting.

Introduction: ISPAD guidelines recommend age appropriate diabetes education concepts for young patients and their families as well as tools for nutritional management, psychosocial assessment, and psychological advice but their implementation in Europe is presently unknown. Methods: On the basis of a structured survey among the European SWEET members information on established tools and programs in national languages were analyzed using an extensive literature and desk search. These were differentiated according to five age-groups and five target groups (young people with diabetes, parents, and other close relations, carers in school and nursery, and healthcare professionals). Results: Responses and original tools were received from 11 SWEET countries reflecting the European status in 2011. More or less structured information for parents, close relations, and carers in school or nursery are available in all 11 participating countries. However, only two countries followed the recommendations of having published a structured, curriculum lead, and evaluated program for different age-groups and carers. One of these was evaluated nationwide and funded by the respective National Health Care System after accreditation. In addition a huge variety of creative tools, e.g., booklets, leaflets, games, videos, and material for educating children of different age-groups and their parents are available -but most of them are not linked to a structured education program. Conclusions: Harmonizing and integrating these materials into quality assured structured holistic national education programs will be an important future task for the ongoing SWEET project. A comprehensive European diabetes educational toolbox is aimed to be published and continuously updated on the SWEET website.