The T1D Exchange Clinic Network and Registry: 10 Years of Enlightenment on the State of Type 1 Diabetes in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 310-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy W. Beck ◽  
Kellee M. Miller ◽  
Nicole C. Foster
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State

scholarly journals Fluctuations in the incidence of type 1 diabetes in the United States from 2001 to 2015: a longitudinal study

BMC Medicine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary A. M. Rogers ◽  
Catherine Kim ◽  
Tanima Banerjee ◽  
Joyce M. Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
The United States

scholarly journals The Future of Clinical Islet Transplantation in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael F Knoll ◽  
Carmela A Knoll ◽  
Rita Bottino ◽  
Massimo Trucco ◽  
Suzanne Bertera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
United States ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Islet Transplantation ◽  
Drug Administration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Clinical Islet Transplantation ◽  
The World

Clinical islet transplantation was first realized over four decades ago at the University of Minnesota. Autologous islet transplantation is now widely recognized as a treatment to prevent diabetes in patients after pancreas excision and is offered at major transplant centers throughout the United States and the world. Type 1 diabetes represents a much larger demographic in which islet transplantation may benefit patients. Allogeneic islet transplantation can now offer similar outcomes to pancreas transplantation in a subset of patients with labile type 1 diabetes with less risk than whole organ transplantation. It is recognized as a standard of care in nations around the world but not in the United States, despite the important developmental role US scientists and physicians have played. Early reports of islet transplantation focused on insulin independence that proved to diminish over time. However, regardless of insulin status, islet transplantation provides benefits ranging from improved quality of life to reduction in diabetic complications. A National Institutes of Health sponsored multi-center Phase 3 Clinical Trial (CIT-07) demonstrated safety and efficacy, although the Food and Drug Administration chose to consider islets as a biologic that requires licensure, which makes offering the procedure in the clinic very challenging. Until regulations can be brought into communion with international standards, allogeneic islet transplantation in the United States is unlikely to match international levels of success and once promising programs are left to wither on the vine. Food and Drug Administration approval would open the door for third party medical reimbursement and allow many patients the opportunity to enjoy better health and quality of life. Establishment of clinical islet transplantation for type 1 diabetes would lead to optimizations in procedures making it more efficacious and cost effective while offering support for ongoing islet xenotransplantation studies that could bring islet transplantation to even more patients.

scholarly journals Estimation of Annual Health Care Costs for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-318
Author(s):  
Vijay N. Joish ◽  
Fang Liz Zhou ◽  
Ronald Preblick ◽  
Dee Lin ◽  
Maithili Deshpande ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Health Care Costs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Costs

1122-P: Comparing the Relative Frequency of Pediatric New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes since the Onset of COVID in the United States

Diabetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1122-P
Author(s):  
DUSTIN ROWLAND ◽  
NICOLE D.O. LEE ◽  
BERRIN ERGUN-LONGMIRE
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Relative Frequency ◽  
The United States ◽  
Onset Type ◽  
New Onset

Type 1 diabetes in older adults: Comparing treatments and chronic complications in the United States T1D Exchange and the German/Austrian DPV registries

2016 ◽  
Vol 122 ◽  
pp. 28-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth S. Weinstock ◽  
Ingrid Schütz-Fuhrmann ◽  
Crystal G. Connor ◽  
Julia M. Hermann ◽  
David M. Maahs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chronic Complications

Provider Implicit Bias Impacts Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes Technology Recommendations in the United States: Findings from The Gatekeeper Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 193229682110064
Author(s):  
Ananta Addala ◽  
Sarah Hanes ◽  
Diana Naranjo ◽  
David M. Maahs ◽  
Korey K. Hood
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Insurance ◽  
Diabetes Technology ◽  
Provider Bias

Background: Diabetes technology use is associated with favorable type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes. American youth with public insurance, a proxy for low socioeconomic status, use less diabetes technology than those with private insurance. We aimed to evaluate the role of insurance-mediated provider implicit bias, defined as the systematic discrimination of youth with public insurance, on diabetes technology recommendations for youth with T1D in the United States. Methods: Multi-disciplinary pediatric diabetes providers completed a bias assessment comprised of a clinical vignette and ranking exercises ( n = 39). Provider bias was defined as providers: (1) recommending more technology for those on private insurance versus public insurance or (2) ranking insurance in the top 2 of 7 reasons to offer technology. Bias and provider characteristics were analyzed with descriptive statistics, group comparisons, and multivariate logistic regression. Results: The majority of providers [44.1 ± 10.0 years old, 83% female, 79% non-Hispanic white, 49% physician, 12.2 ± 10.0 practice-years] demonstrated bias ( n = 33/39, 84.6%). Compared to the group without bias, the group with bias had practiced longer (13.4±10.4 years vs 5.7 ± 3.6 years, P = .003) but otherwise had similar characteristics including age (44.4 ± 10.2 vs 42.6 ± 10.1, p = 0.701). In the logistic regression, practice-years remained significant (OR = 1.47, 95% CI [1.02,2.13]; P = .007) when age, sex, race/ethnicity, provider role, percent public insurance served, and workplace location were included. Conclusions: Provider bias to recommend technology based on insurance was common in our cohort and increased with years in practice. There are likely many reasons for this finding, including healthcare system drivers, yet as gatekeepers to diabetes technology, providers may be contributing to inequities in pediatric T1D in the United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document