Monday, March 4, 2019

Technology Has Changed the Live of Teen Agers

inside 10. 1111/j. 1464-5491. 2006. 01868. x Glycaemic hold in Review Article 23 0742-3071Publishing, intoxicant diabetic Medicine and2006 aspiration D. Ismail et al. DME UK Oxford, article Blackwell Publishing Ltd Social white plague of inebriant in adolespennys with role 1 diabetes is associated with increased glucose lability, but non hypoglycemia D. Ismail, R. Gebert, P. J. Vuillermin, L. Fraser*, C. M. McDonnell, S. M. Donath and F. J. Cameron AbstractDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Royal Childrens hospital, Melbourne, *Wimmera Base Hospital*, Horsham and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Royal Childrens Hospital, Melbourne, Australia Accepted 10 June 2005 Aims To pick up the effects of tender uptake of alcoholic beverage by diabetic adolescents on glycaemic manipulate. Methods Fourteen (five male) perseverings aged 16 days were recruited from the diabetes clinic at the Royal Childrens Hospital. The uninterrupted glucose monitoring syst em (CGMS) was wedded at a weekend when alcohol aspiration was planned for wholeness darkness only.For each patient, the 12-h uttermost from 18. 00 h to 06. 00 h for the night with alcohol usage ( area arrest) was compared with the same close with non-alcohol uptake ( keep gunpoint) either 24 h in front or afterwards the alcohol break down night. Thus, each rout was his /her own rule. Glycaemic outcomes calculated from continuous glucose monitoring included mean ancestry glucose (MBG), percentage of succession spent at low glucose levels (CGMS 4. 0 mmol/l), median(prenominal) glucose levels (CGMS 4. 010. 0 mmol/ l) and high glucose levels ( 10. mmol/ l) and continuous boilersuit net glycaemic run (CONGA). Results The mean number of standard alcohol drinks consumed during the regard period was 9. 0 for males and 6. 3 for females. There was no difference in percentage of sequence at high and universal glucose levels in the bring and control periods. During the c ontrol period, in that respect was a higher percentage of condemnation with low glucose levels compared with the probe period (P 0. 05). There was an increased level of glycaemic variation during the subscribe to time when compared with the control period.Conclusions In an uncontrolled, social linguistic context, moderately heavy alcohol spending by adolescents with Type 1 diabetes appears to be associated with increased glycaemic variation, but not with low glucose levels. Diabet. Med. 23, 830833 (2006) Keywords adolescence, alcohol, glycaemic control Abbreviations CGMS, continuous glucose monitoring system CONGA, continuous all overall net glycaemic action MBG, mean channel glucose RCH, Royal Childrens Hospital Introduction Adolescents with Type 1 diabetes frequently fetter in risk-taking activities 1.Amongst these activities is the social Correspondence to Dr Fergus Cameron, Deputy Director, Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Royal Childrens Hospital, Flemington R oad, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. netmail fergus. emailprotected org. au consumption of alcohol, frequently as underage drinkers 2. Whilst the effects of alcohol consumption upon glycaemia have been well described in a controlled backing 3 6, little is known about the impact on glucose levels of alcohol consumption by adolescents within an ambulant, social context.The purpose of this project was to utilize continuous glucose monitoring to study the impact of social alcohol consumption on glycaemic control in a group of alcohol-using adolescents. 2006 The Authors. 830 journal compilation 2006 Diabetes UK. diabetic Medicine, 23, 830833 Review article 831 Patients and methods This study was approved by the Human morals Research Committee of the Royal Childrens Hospital (RCH). That approbation was contingent on(p) upon the fact that the investigators should not be seen to encourage underage drinking in adolescents.Consequently, we only approached adolescents who we knew w ere drinking socially and, despite our previous steering, elected to hold to drink alcohol on a semi-regular basis. We recruited 22 adolescents with Type 1 diabetes from the RCH diabetes clinic. The adolescents were considered eligible only if 16 eld old and parental/patient consent was obtained. HbA 1c (Bayer DCA 2000 immunoagglutination method, Calabria, Barcelona, Spain) was placardd, and diabetes duration and insulin doses were recorded. The MiniMed continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) was attached to the study patients over a weekend period.Patients were required to have an alcohol-free period for at least 24 continuous hours during the weekend trace period. A journal was kept of activities during the trace period (insulin injections, meal, snacks, dancing, alcohol consumption, sport). There was no metamorphose in insulin doses between study and control periods. In the evening when alcohol was consumed, patients were asked to recall how many and what type of drinks were consumed and how inebriated they became. Patients recall of alcohol consumption was converted to standard drinks ( hotshot standard drink contains the equivalent of 12. ml c% alcohol) using The Australian Alcohol Guidelines 7. CGMS data was recorded between 18. 00 and 06. 00 h on the evening when alcohol was consumed (the study period) and between 18. 00 and 06. 00 h on the evening when no alcohol was consumed (the control period). CGMS data were only analysed if there had been regular calibrations with intermittent hairlike blood glucose readings at a level best of 8-h intervals. each CGMS trace was qualitatively and quantitatively analysed using mean glucose determine, per cent time in glycaemic ranges and ontinuous overlapping net glycaemic action (CONGA) 8. CONGA determine were calculated to assess glycaemic variation over 1-, 2- and 4-h intervals. Low glucose set were delineate as CGMS values 4 mmol/ l, normal glucose values when CGMS values were 4 10 mmo/ l and h igh glucose values when CGMS values were 10 mmol/ l. Each patient acted as their own control with study periods and control periods universe compared. Inter-individual values were grouped for comparison. Differences between study and control periods were analysed using polar t-tests. Analyses were done in Stata 9. ales and nine females. The mean age was 18. 5 years (range 17. 4 19. 5). The mean duration of diabetes was 9. 4 years (range 3 16. 3). half-dozen of our subjects took four insulin injections per day and eight took two injections daily. The mean insulin dose was 1. 1 social units /kg/day (range 0. 7 1. 8), and the mean HbA1c was 9. 6% (range 8. 2 10. 8). Activities during the study period Thirteen subjects had dinner out front drinking and only one subject did not consume any food before red out. Three subjects danced a lot and six subjects went dancing but did not dance a lot.Ten subjects had something to eat after drinking. Alcohol consumption during the study p eriod The mean number of alcohol drinks consumed on the study night was 9. 0 (range 316) for males and 6. 3 (range 314) for females. All the females consumed pre- abstruse sweetened alcohol drinks (5% alcohol), with only one consuming beer and one consuming wine. Four of the males consumed mixed spirits, one mixed spirits and beer and one beer only. Forty per cent of the males had much(prenominal) than seven standard drinks during the study and 67% of the females had more than five drinks.In total, 80% of the subjects had pre-mixed sweetened alcohol drinks at some point during the study period. cardinal per cent of the subjects reported that they became inebriated and 14. 3% consumed alcohol to the point where they became physically sick. None of the subjects lost consciousness or took recreational drugs during the study period. proportional CGMS data between study and control periods Results Patients There was no authoritative difference between the overall mean glucose levels of patients when comparing study and control periods (Table 1 P = 0. 43).Similarly, there were no significant differences in the gist of time spent with either normal or high glucose values between study and control periods (Table 1). A larger proportion of time was spent with low glucose values during the control period when compared with the study period (1. 9 vs. 16. 8%, P = 0. 03). A significantly larger item of glycaemic variation was seen in the CONGA values in the study period when compared with the control period (Table 1). The difference in CONGA values were consistent and independent of whether glycaemic variation was assessed over 1-, 2- or 4-h intervals.Of the 22 subjects recruited, eight were excluded because their CGMS traces did not have sufficiently frequent calibration points with intermittent capillary measures of blood glucose. Of the 14 subjects remaining, we were able to obtain study period data on 14 patients and matched control period data on only 12 patie nts. The study period occurred on the night prior to the control period in nine subjects. There were five Discussion It has long been recognised that a prohibitionist approach is usually ineffective when counselling adolescents who engage in risk-taking behaviours 10.Many centres today, ourselves included, have instead adopted a harm minimisation approach in dealing with such behaviours. An important component 2006 The Authors. journal compilation 2006 Diabetes UK. Diabetic Medicine, 23, 830833 832 Glycaemic control and alcohol consumption D. Ismail et al. Outcome measure Mean difference between Study period Control period study period and mean value mean value control period (95%CI) P-value 10. 6 16. 8 58. 6 24. 6 2. 1 3. 2 3. 7 1. 2 (? 2. 1, 4. 4) ? 14. 9 (? 28. 1, ? 1. 8) ? 0. 8 (? 27. 3, 25. 8) 15. 7 (? 4. 5, 35. 8) 0. 6 (0. 2, 1. 0) 1. 1 (0. , 1. 9) 1. 8 (0. 4, 3. 1) 0. 43 0. 03 0. 95 0. 12 0. 006 0. 01 0. 01 Table 1 CGMS outcomes, study and control periods Blood glucose lev els (mmol/l) 11. 8 Per cent time low glucose 1. 9 Per cent time high glucose 57. 8 Per cent time normal glucose 40. 3 CONGA1* 2. 7 CONGA2* 4. 3 CONGA4* 5. 5 *CONGA calculated at 1-, 2- and 4-h intervals. CONGAn is the standard deviation of different glucose measures n hours apart for the duration of the CGMS trace. of counselling using a harm minimization approach is that the information provided be credible and reflective of real or lived circumstances.Continuous glucose monitoring provides a technique whereby the glycaemic consequences of various behaviours can be documented in an ambulant or non-artificial setting. Adolescents with Type 1 diabetes frequently consume alcohol in a social context 11. Alcohol is known to inhibit the gluconeogenic pathway, to inhibit lipolysis, featherbed glucose counter-regulation and blunt hypoglycaemia awareness 3,4. Previous studies in untried adults with Type 1 diabetes have shown that moderate consumption of alcohol in the evenings without n onessential food recess may cause hypoglycaemia the following dawn 5.Consumption of alcohol after a meal, however, has shown no connatural adverse effects on glucose 6. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that alcohol consumption may be a significant risk factor for hypoglycaemia in adolescents with Type 1 diabetes 5. Studies of the glycaemic effects of alcohol consumption in an ambulant adolescent/young adult population can be difficult. This is because such behaviours are uncontrolled, frequently spontaneous and usually in the context of other social activities (parties, dancing, and so on ).In order to ensure that we only reported accurate CGMS data during these activities, capillary blood glucose calibration was considered vital and those patients who failed in this regard were excluded from analysis. Just over 60% of the patients recruited were able to successfully wear and calibrate a CGMS unit during these activities. Given that patients who experience hypoglycemic sy mptoms are more likely to achieve capillary self measures of blood glucose, we feel that it is unlikely that those patients excluded from the analysis had a great frequency of hypoglycaemia than those patients reported.We were unable to record our subjects alcohol consumption in a contemporaneous fashion and hence were reliant upon their recall. It is workable that their remembered patterns of consumption were not entirely accurate. This potential inaccuracy should not be seen as a weakness of this study, as we only set out to determine patterns of glycaemia in adolescents engaging in spontaneous and uncontrolled alcohol consumption. We uncomplete specified the type nor the amount of alcohol to be consumed (our ethical approval was contingent on this not occurring).The data as to amount of alcohol consumed have been included for descriptive purposes only. The results of this study show that alcohol consumption by adolescents in a social context is associated with a greater degre e of glycaemic variation and less time spent with low glucose values than evenings where no alcohol is consumed. Whilst the second of these findings appears counter-intuitive, there may be some(prenominal) possible explanations. Firstly, the vast majority of our study group ate a meal prior to going out and ate upon their return before going to bed.These are practices that we have instilled as harm minimization strategies to suspend alcohol-induced hypoglycaemia in our clinic. Secondly, most of the alcohol consumed was as pre-mixed spirit and sweetened, carbonate beverages. Finally, alcohol consumption was only associated with vigorous exercise (dancing) in a minority of our study group. All of these factors could have combined to negate the hypoglycaemic effects of alcohol. In a previous study of glycaemia during alcohol consumption in adult men 5, hypoglycaemia occurred most often 1012 h after wine consumption when the evening before ended at 23. 0 h. We analysed our data to see if a similar phenomenon occurred in this study and found that the per cent of time spent with CGMS readings 4 mmol/l between 06. 00 and 12. 00 h on the morning after the study period (i. e. the morning after the drinking night) was only 1. 1%. barely the fact that our cohort frequently consumed alcohol later than 23. 00 h, the factors that impacted upon glycaemic control during the study night appear to have carried over to the morning after. The findings in this study highlight the importance of ambulant testing.It is important to invoice that the findings of the group studied here may not be seen in adolescents who drink non-sweetened alcoholic drinks or in those adolescents with better underlying metabolic control. Whilst alcohol consumption in isolation may reasonably be thought to cause hypoglycaemia, alcohol consumption by adolescents in the context of meals, sweetened mixers and little activity did not result in more hypoglycaemia than an alcohol-free evening. Whether th e increase in glycaemic variation seen on an evening 2006 The Authors. Journal compilation 2006 Diabetes UK.Diabetic Medicine, 23, 830833 Review article 833 of alcohol consumption has negative clinical outcomes remains an area for further investigation. Competing interests CMM was a Novo Nordisk research fellow. FJC received fees for harangue at conferences and funds for research from Novo Nordisk. References 1 Cameron F, Werther G. Adolescents with diabetes mellitus. In Menon, RK, Sperling, MA, eds. Pediatric Diabetes. capital of Massachusetts Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003 319335. 2 Frey MA, Guthrie B, Lovelandcherry C, Park PS, Foster CM. Risky behaviours and risk in adolescents with IDDM.J Adol Health 1997 20 3845. 3 Avogaro A, Beltramello P, Gnudi L, Maran A, Valerio A, Miola M et al. Alcohol intake impairs glucose counterregulation during acute insulin-induced hypoglycaemia in IDDM patients. Diabetes 1993 42 16261634. 4 Kerr D, Macdonald IA, hellion SR, Tattersal RB. Alco hol causes hypoglycaemic unawareness in healthy volunteers and patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 1990 33 216221. 5 Turner BC, Jenkins E, Kerr D, Sherwin RS, Cavan DA. The effect of evening alcohol consumption on next morning glucose control in type 1 diabetes.Diabetes allot 2001 24 18881893. 6 Koivisto VA, Tulokas S, Toivonen M, Haapa E, Pelkonen R. Alcohol with a meal has no adverse effects on postprandial glucose homeostasis in diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 1993 16 16121614. 7 National Health and Medical Research Council. Australian Alcohol Guidelines Health Risks and Benefits. DS9. Available from http//www7. health. gov. au/nhmrc/publications/synopses/ds9syn. htm. 8 McDonnell CM, Donath SM, Vidmar SI, Werther GA, Cameron FJ. A sweet approach to continuous glucose analysis utilising glycaemic variation.Diab Tech Therap 2005 7 253263. 9 StataCorp. Stata statistical software. Release 8. 0. College Station, TX Stata Corporation, 2003. 10 Kyngas H, Hentinen M, Barlow JH . Adolescents perceptions of physicians, nurses, parents and friends help or hindrance in meekness with diabetes self-care? J Adv Nurs 1998 27 760769. 11 Patterson JM, Garwick AW. Coping with chronic illness. In Werther, GA, Court, JM, eds. Diabetes and the Adolescent. Melbourne Miranova Publishers 1998, 334. 2006 The Authors. Journal compilation 2006 Diabetes UK. Diabetic Medicine, 23, 830833

No comments:

Post a Comment