Glycated Hemoglobin Differences Among Blog-Reading Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Compared With Those Who Do Not Read Blogs: Cross-Sectional Study.
Glycated Hemoglobin Differences Among Blog-Reading Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Compared With Those Who Do Not Read Blogs: Cross-Sectional Study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/13634
复制
发表时间：
2019-04-02
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Oser, Tamara K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Oser, Sean M;Stuckey, Heather L;Oser, Tamara K
背景：在估计的2310万糖尿病患者中，约5%患有1型糖尿病（T1 D）。有人提议，到2050年，这一数字将增加两倍。随着技术使用和可用资源的增加，许多人正在使用胰岛素泵和连续葡萄糖监测仪（CGMs）来帮助管理他们的T1 D。他们还利用社交媒体等在线资源，根据同龄人的真实生活经验寻找更多信息和建议。博客是一种特殊的社交媒体形式，经常使用的人与T1 D，但还没有被广泛investigated.Objective：本研究的目的是评估糖化血红蛋白（HbA 1c）之间的差异博客读者和博客nonusers在人群中的成年T1 D。这项研究还着眼于在这两个组中的技术使用的差异，以及在博客使用和技术subgroup.METHODS：参与者通过邮件和T1 D主题的在线博客文章招募的HbA 1c的差异。受访者完成了安全的在线资格评估，并被问及与他们的T1 D，博客和互联网使用，胰岛素泵和CGM使用相关的问题。还收集了人口统计学资料。博客读者和博客非用户之间的差异进行了测试，通过卡方和t检验。Mann-Whitney U检验，Fisher精确检验和方差分析（ANOVA）被用来测试组和subgroup. Results之间的差异自我报告的HbA 1c：共有282名合格的参与者完成了调查（214博客读者，68博客nonusers）。糖尿病平均病程为21.2年，77.7%（219/282）为女性，81.2%（229/282）使用胰岛素泵，66.3%（187/282）使用CGM，95.7%（270/282）为白色。博客阅读者（7.0%）的HbA 1c低于博客非使用者（7.5%），P= 0.006;胰岛素泵使用者（7.0%）低于每日多次注射者（7.7%），P= 0.001; CGM使用者（7.0%）低于CGM非使用者（7.5%），P= 0.001。在调整了显著的协变量后，博客使用和HbA 1c之间的关联仍然显著（P= 0.04）。方差分析模型还显示，在泵使用和CGM使用的亚组中，博客使用者和非博客使用者之间的HbA 1c存在显著差异（P
BACKGROUND: Of the estimated 23.1 million individuals diagnosed with diabetes, approximately 5% have type 1 diabetes (T1D). It has been proposed that this number will triple by 2050. With increases in technology use and resources available, many individuals are using insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) to help manage their T1D. They are also using online resources such as social media to find more information and advice based on real-life experiences from peers. Blogs are a particular social media modality often used by people with T1D but have not been widely investigated.OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) differences between blog readers and blog nonusers in a population of adults with T1D. This study also looked at differences in technology use in these two groups, as well as HbA1c differences in blog use and technology subgroups.METHODS: Participants were recruited both by mail and by online T1D-themed blog postings. Respondents completed a secure online eligibility assessment and were asked questions related to their T1D, blog and internet use, and insulin pump and CGM use. Demographics were also collected. Differences between blog readers and blog nonusers were tested via chi-square and t tests. Mann-Whitney U tests, Fisher exact tests, and analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to test for differences in self-reported HbA1c between groups and subgroups.RESULTS: A total of 282 eligible participants completed the survey (214 blog readers, 68 blog nonusers). Average duration of diabetes was 21.2 years, 77.7% (219/282) were female, 81.2% (229/282) used an insulin pump, 66.3% (187/282) used a CGM, and 95.7% (270/282) were white. HbA1c was lower for blog readers (7.0%) than blog nonusers (7.5%), P=.006; for insulin pump users (7.0%) than multiple daily injections (7.7%), P=.001; and for CGM users (7.0%) than CGM nonusers (7.5%), P=.001. After adjusting for significant covariates, the association between blog use and HbA1c remained significant (P=.04). ANOVA modeling also demonstrated significant differences in HbA1c between blog users and nonusers among subgroups by pump use and CGM use (P