Sleep in Caregivers of Children With Type 1 Diabetes

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to explore caregivers’ descriptions of their experience of nighttime sleep.

Design and Methods

Caregivers (N = 22) of children 10 to 18 years of age with type 1 diabetes (T1D) were recruited for this descriptive study. Anonymous questionnaires contained demographic information and both open- and closed-ended questions that focused on caregiving as it related to sleep. Open-ended questions were reviewed to help understand the effect of nocturnal caregiving activities on parental sleep.

Results

The sample of caregivers were all female and had a mean age of 43 years; 96% graduated high school, 68% were married or partnered, and 100% were white. Children had been diagnosed with T1D for a mean of 5 years, with a mean age of 12.2 years. Caregivers reported short sleep duration (mean, 5.8 hours). Over half of the participants reported they required ≥7 hours of sleep to feel their best, 64% indicated trouble sleeping at night, and 86% reported that caregiving interfered with their nighttime sleep, while 54% responded that sleep was “very important.” Content analysis of the open-ended questions revealed 2 themes: (1) anxiety about the child’s blood glucose levels and (2) nighttime disruptions.

Conclusions

Caregivers are frequently sleep deprived and worry about their child’s nighttime glucose. Caregiving duties, anxiety, and sleep fragmentation may contribute to their poor sleep.

Are children with type 1 diabetes safe at school? Examining parent perceptions

OBJECTIVE

To describe parent perceptions of children's diabetes care at school including: availability of licensed health professionals; staff training; logistics of provision of care; and occurrence and treatment of hypo- and hyperglycemia; and to examine parents' perceptions of their children's safety and satisfaction in the school environment.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A survey was completed by parents of children with type 1 diabetes from permissive (trained, non-medical school personnel permitted to provide diabetes care; N = 237) and non-permissive (only licensed health care professionals permitted to provide diabetes care; N = 198) states.

RESULTS

Most parents reported that schools had nurses available for the school day; teachers and coaches should be trained; nurses, children, and parents frequently provided diabetes care; and hypo- and hyperglycemia occurred often. Parents in permissive states perceived children to be as safe and were as satisfied with care as parents in non-permissive states.

CONCLUSIONS

Training non-medical staff will probably maximize safety of children with diabetes when a school nurse is not available.