Technology Use and Diabetes Management Across Elder Age Groups in Type 1 Diabetes and Latent Auto-Immune Diabetes in Adults, a BETTER Registry Cross-Sectional Analysis
- PMID: 40147717
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eprac.2025.03.009
Technology Use and Diabetes Management Across Elder Age Groups in Type 1 Diabetes and Latent Auto-Immune Diabetes in Adults, a BETTER Registry Cross-Sectional Analysis
Abstract
Objectives: Real-world data on diabetes management among a heterogenous aging population remain limited. This study aims to provide an overview of technology use and factors associated to its use, diabetes management, and psychosocial aspects experienced by adults aged 50 and over living with type 1 diabetes or latent autoimmune diabetes in adults.
Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the Canadian BETTER registry, mostly based on self-reported outcomes from individuals living with type 1 diabetes or latent autoimmune diabetes in adults. Comparative analyses were conducted across 3 age groups: 50-59, 60-69, and ≥ 70.
Results: Participants (n = 674) were predominantly Caucasian (97% to 98% across groups) and residing in Quebec, Canada (71% to 79%). Insulin pump use was similar across age groups (36% to 39%, P = .822), while continuous glucose monitoring was lower among those aged ≥ 70 years (85% for both 50-59 and 60-69 vs 73% for ≥ 70 years, P = .020). Among other factors, having private insurance and living outside of Quebec were positively associated with both insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring use. A high proportion (80% to 86%) of participants achieved an HbA1c ≤ 8% across all groups. Level 2 hypoglycemia events in the last month were more frequent among participants aged 50-59 years compared to those aged ≥70 years (6.9 vs 3.4, P = .001). Level 3 hypoglycemia, social and professional support were similar between groups. Interestingly, diabetes-related distress was lower in older age groups.
Conclusions: Most individuals in this cohort adopted technology use but in lower proportion among the group aged ≥70. Overall, diabetes management was good and similar between age groups.
Keywords: aging; older people; real-world; technology; type 1 diabetes.
Copyright © 2025 AACE. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosure A.S.B. has received speaker honorarium from Dexcom. V.M. received purchase fees from E Lilly (artificial pancreas). R.R.L. reports the following: 1. Research grants: Diabetes Canada, AstraZeneca, E Lilly, Cystic Fibrosis Canada, CIHR, FFRD, Janssen, JDRF, Merck, NIH, Novo-Nordisk, Société Francophone du Diabète, Sanofi-Aventis, Vertex Pharmaceutical. 2. Consulting /advisory panel: Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer I, Dexcom, E Lilly, HLS therapeutics, INESSS, Insulet, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novo-Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis. 3. Honoraria for conferences: Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer I, CPD Network, Dexcom, CMS Canadian Medical & Surgical Knowledge Translation Research group, E Lilly, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novo-Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Tandem, Vertex Pharmaceutical. 4. Consumable gift (in Kind): E Lilly, Medtronic. 5. Unrestricted grants for clinical and educational activities: Abbott, E Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis. 6. Patent: T2D risk biomarkers, catheter life. 7. Purchase fees: E Lilly (artificial pancreas)]. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
