| 1. |
- Sumnik, Z., et al.
(author)
-
Persistent heterogeneity in diabetes technology reimbursement for children with type 1 diabetes: The SWEET perspective
- 2019
-
In: Pediatric Diabetes. - : Hindawi Limited. - 1399-543X .- 1399-5448. ; 20:4, s. 434-443
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Frequent use of modern diabetes technologies increases the chance for optimal type 1 diabetes (T1D) control. Limited reimbursement influences the access of patients with T1D to these modalities and could worsen their prognosis. We aimed to describe the situation of reimbursement for insulins, glucometers, insulin pumps (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for children with T1D in European countries participating in the SWEET Project and to compare data from EU countries with data from our previous study in 2009. Methods: The study was conducted between March 2017 and August 2017. First, we approached diabetes technology companies with a survey to map the reimbursement of insulins and diabetic devices. The data collected from these companies were then validated by members of the SWEET consortium. Results: We collected data from 29 European countries, whereas all types of insulins are mostly fully covered, heterogeneity was observed regarding the reimbursement of strips for glucometers (from 90 strips/month to no limit). CSII is readily available in 20 of 29 countries. Seven countries reported significant quota issues or obstacles for CSII prescription, and two countries had no CSII reimbursement. CGM is at least partially reimbursed in 17 of 29 countries. The comparison with the 2009 study showed an increasing availability of CSII and CGM across the EU. Conclusions: Although innovative diabetes technology is available, a large proportion of children with T1D still do not benefit from it due to its limited reimbursement. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
|
|
| 2. |
- Vazeou, A., et al.
(author)
-
The Importance of Office Blood Pressure Measurement Frequency and Methodology in Evaluating the Prevalence of Hypertension in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: The SWEET International Database
- 2022
-
In: Diabetes Care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 1935-5548 .- 0149-5992. ; 45:6, s. 1462-1471
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of hypertension is higher in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) compared with those without. This retrospective analysis of a large cohort of children and adolescents with T1D from the SWEET (Better control in Pediatric and Adolescent diabeteS: Working to crEate CEnTers of Reference) international consortium of pediatric diabetes centers aimed to 1) estimate the prevalence of elevated office blood pressure (BP) and hypertension and 2) investigate the influence of BP measurement methodology on the prevalence of hypertension. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 27,120 individuals with T1D, aged 5-18 years, were analyzed. Participants were grouped into those with BP measurements at three or more visits (n = 10,440) and fewer than 3 visits (n = 16,680) per year and stratified by age and sex. A subgroup analysis was performed on 15,742 individuals from centers providing a score indicating BP measurement accuracy. RESULTS: Among participants with BP measurement at three or more visits, the prevalence of hypertension was lower compared with those with fewer than three visits (10.8% vs. 17.5% P < 0.001), whereas elevated BP and normotension were higher (17.5% and 71.7% vs. 15.3% and 67.1%, respectively; both P < 0.001). The prevalence of hypertension and elevated BP was higher in individuals aged ≥13 years than in younger ones (P < 0.001) and in male than female participants (P < 0.001). In linear regression models, systolic and diastolic BP was independently determined by the BP measurement methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated prevalence of elevated BP and hypertension in children and adolescents with T1D is ∼30% and depends on the BP measurement methodology. Less frequent BP evaluation may overestimate the prevalence of hypertension.
|
|
