Variation in nutrition education practices in SWEET pediatric diabetes centers—an international comparison

• Published in: Pediatric diabetes Vol. 22; no. 2; pp. 215 - 220
• Main Authors: Alonso, Guy Todd, Fink, Katharina, Maffeis, Claudio, Jannet, Svensson, Sari, Krepel‐Volsky, Elizabeth, Davis, Przemysława, Jarosz‐Chobot, Yash, Patel, Carmel, Smart
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Former Munksgaard John Wiley & Sons A/S 01-03-2021; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Adolescent; Child; Child Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; children; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus (insulin dependent); Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - therapy; education; Female; Glycated Hemoglobin A; Humans; Insulin; Male; nutrition; Nutrition education; Patient Education as Topic; Patients; Pediatrics; Practice Patterns, Physicians; Registries; Regression analysis; Snacks; Surveys and Questionnaires; Sweet taste; type 1 diabetes; Variation; nutrition; type 1 diabetes; education; children
• ISSN: 1399-543X; 1399-5448
• DOI: 10.1111/pedi.13161

Background
Nutrition education is central to pediatric type 1 diabetes management. Dietary management guidelines for type 1 diabetes are evidence based, but implementation may be challenging and inconsistent. We describe variation in the practice of nutrition education across pediatric diabetes centers globally and explore associations with A1c and BMI.
Methods
In 2018, 77 pediatric diabetes clinics in the SWEET network received a survey about nutrition education. Using data submitted to the registry, regression analysis corrected for age, diabetes duration, BMI, and sex was used to compare survey parameters with A1c and BMI.
Results
Fifty‐three centers who collectively cared for 22,085 patients aged 0 to 18 with type 1 diabetes responded. Median A1c was 7.68% [IQR 7.37–8.03], age 13.13 y [12.60–13.54], insulin pump use 39.1%, and continuous glucose monitor use 37.3%. 34% reported screening for disordered eating, but only 15.1% used validated screening tools. Recommending insulin boluses for snacks in patients taking insulin via injection varied, with 23% of the clinics giving this recommendation to half or fewer patients. In regression analysis, instructing patients to take insulin for snacks was the only survey parameter associated with the percent of clinic percent of patients attaining A1c <7.5% (<58 mmol/mol, P = 0.018) and < 7.0% (<53 mmol/mol, P = 0.026).
Conclusions
There is considerable variation in nutrition education for pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes across this international registry. Consistently recommending independent of treatment modality (insulin pump or injections) that patients take insulin for snacks and more uniformity in screening for disordered eating are improvement opportunities.