ObjectivesChildren with diabetes are advised to see their diabetes team every 3 months, with interim communication to address insulin dose adjustments. Despite increasing digital accessibility, there is limited data on whether provider–patient communication frequency is associated with glycemic control in pediatric diabetes. We assessed patterns of communication between diabetes clinic visits and whether communication frequency via electronic messaging (EM) and telephone was associated with glycemic control in pediatric diabetes.MethodsRetrospective chart review of 267 children with type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) over a 1-year period (July 2018–June 2019) at an urban academic pediatric diabetes center. Association between frequency of communication (via EM and telephone) and HbA1c was analyzed using regression analysis.ResultsOf 267 participants, 224 (84%) had T1DM, 43 (16%) had T2DM, mean age 11.6 years (SD 4), mean duration of diabetes 3.5 years (SD 3.4), and mean HbA1c 73.8 ± 23 mmol/mol (8.9 ± 2.2%). Most participants (82%) communicated with their diabetes team at least once per year, with a mean number of overall communications of 10.3 ± 13.6 times. Communications were via EM (48%), phone (40%), or both (53%). Participants with more frequent communication had lower HbA1c values (p=0.007), even when controlling for age, sex, provider, and number of clinic visits per year. We determined that a threshold of three communications per year was associated with a lower HbA1c (p=0.006).ConclusionsMore frequent communication with the diabetes team between visits is associated with improved glycemic control. Initiatives to contact diabetes patients between clinic visits may impact their overall glycemic control.

Background: Children with diabetes are advised to see their diabetes team every 3 months. While we encourage patients and caregivers to communicate between visits, there is limited evidence to support this recommendation. Therefore, we assessed patterns of communication between visits and whether communication frequency via phone and electronic messaging (EMs) is associated with glycemic control. We hypothesized that patients who communicate more frequently will have better glycemic control as measured by hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Methods: We assessed communication patterns via EMs and phone calls in children with type 1 and type 2 diabetes over a 1-year period at an urban academic pediatric diabetes center. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical record. The association between frequency of communication and HbA1c was analyzed using regression analysis. Results: 122 patients were included in this analysis, of which 99 (80%) had T1D, 23 (20%) had T2D. Mean age 11.8y (SD 3.9), mean duration of diabetes 3.5y (SD 3.4), and mean HbA1c 9% (range 4.7-15%). Most patients/caregivers (101/122, 89%) communicated with the diabetes team between office visits. Communications were via phone (27%), EM (29%), or both (42%). Patients with more frequent communication had lower HbA1c values (p=0.008, β =-0.04). Method of communication was not associated with HbA1c. Conclusions: More frequent communication with the diabetes team between visits is associated with improved glycemic control, irrespective of the method of communication. Thus, communication with patients should be tailored to their preference. Disclosure K. Abel: None. R. Verma: None. C.G. Thomas: None. M. West: None. C. Glancey: None. J. Tracey: None. K. Arcara: None. S.N. Magge: None. R. Wolf: None.