Premium
School‐aged children with type 1 diabetes benefit more from a coping skills training program than adolescents in China: 12‐month outcomes of a randomized clinical trial
Author(s) -
Guo Jia,
Luo Jiaxin,
Yang Jundi,
Huang Lingling,
Wiley James,
Liu Fang,
Li Xia,
Zhou Zhiguang,
Whittemore Robin
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
pediatric diabetes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.678
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1399-5448
pISSN - 1399-543X
DOI - 10.1111/pedi.12975
Subject(s) - medicine , psychosocial , glycated hemoglobin , coping (psychology) , randomized controlled trial , psychological intervention , diabetes mellitus , type 1 diabetes , self efficacy , diabetes management , physical therapy , type 2 diabetes , clinical psychology , psychiatry , psychology , psychotherapist , endocrinology
Abstract Background Managing type 1 diabetes can be challenging, especially for youth, so there is a need for effective interventions to help youth live with diabetes. Objective To determine the efficacy of a coping skills training (CST) program for Chinese youth with type 1 diabetes and to explore whether the efficacy of the program was different for school‐aged children than for adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Methods A total of 100 youth with type 1 diabetes aged 8 to 20 years were randomly placed in either an intervention group (CST + standard care [SC]) or a control group (SC). Data were collected at baseline, 6‐month, and 12‐month follow‐ups on primary outcomes of perceived stress, coping, and self‐efficacy and secondary outcomes of diabetes self‐management, quality of life, and glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). A generalized estimating equation analysis for repeated measures was used to determine the program effects and differential effects by age group. Results The CST program had no significant effect on primary or secondary outcomes over 12 months. However, there was a significant increase in positive coping ( P < .001), self‐efficacy ( P = .017), diabetes problem‐solving and goals of diabetes self‐management ( P = .007, P = .001), and quality of life ( P = .016) of school‐aged children in the intervention group compared with the control group. There were no significant differences in primary or secondary outcomes between the intervention group and the control group ( P > .05). Conclusions The CST program was effective for school‐aged children, improving psychosocial and diabetes self‐management outcomes. Further research is needed to develop programs that improve outcomes in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.