Results in perspective
PROM, Diabetes, diabetes type 1.Overall, diabetes
DIABETES TYPE 1, TYPE 1 DIABETES, DIABETES, DIABETES
The study results are consistent with those of prior research in the area of virtual health interventions for individuals with type 1 diabetes [The present study included 79 participants, 35 in the intervention group and 44 in the control group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, diabetes duration, sex, type of therapy or baseline HbA1c levels. At the 6-month follow-up, 71 participants were included. Regarding HbA1c levels and TIR, the participants in present study did not differ significantly from the group of young adults with diabetes type 1 with data in the Swedish National Diabetes Register. However, HbA1c levels were slightly higher among the participants in the present study, compared with data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (63.5 vs. 59.6 mmol/mol).The findings from this study suggest that while the intervention may not have had a significant impact on traditional diabetes outcomes such as glycaemic control, it did yield a favorable effect on a specific aspect of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), specifically, the perceived burden of physical health. A potential explanation could be that the person can easily come into contact with the caregiver, which can create a feeling of security, which can lead to the person’s focus and energy being redirected towards other pursuits.This is an important consideration for healthcare providers and policymakers when deciding on interventions for people with diabetes [It is also noteworthy that both the intervention group and the control group perceived a high burden of living with diabetes, indicating that diabetes management is a complex and challenging task. Future research could explore additional interventions or support systems to alleviate the burden of diabetes management and improve quality of life for young people with diabetes type 1.Overall, this study adds to the evidence base on diabetes management interventions and highlights the importance of considering PROMs such as quality of life alongside traditional clinical outcomes. Future research could further explore interventions that target non-traditional outcomes and investigate their long-term effects.