Seasonal variation in glycemic control has been postulated to occur in school-aged children with type 1 diabetes, with higher HbA1c levels during summer months than during the school year because of lack of structure and less stringent adherence to a prescribed medical regimen during summer vacation (1). To address this question, we used data obtained in 1,972 youth with type 1 diabetes enrolled in the T1D Exchange (T1DX) at 56 clinical centers in the U.S. between 2010 and 2012 (2).
To be included in these analyses, participants had to be 8 to <18 years of age, have a type 1 diabetes duration >3 years to minimize the influence of changes in residual endogenous insulin secretion over time, and have HbA1c measurements in each of three predefined periods: prior to the start of summer (March, April, May), end of summer vacation (August and September), and back in school (November and December). HbA1c values were compared across the three time periods using a Kruskal-Wallis test to account for the skewed distribution of HbA1c within each time period. Because of multiple comparisons and large sample size only P values < 0.01 were considered statistically significant.
The mean age was 13.2 ± 2.7 years, mean duration of diabetes was 7.4 ± 2.8 years (range 4–17 years), 51% of participants were female, and the majority of participants were non-Hispanic whites (79%). Frequencies of pump (66%) and continuous glucose monitor (8%) use were similar to rates described for use of these technologies in the entire pediatric cohort of the T1DX (3). Across the entire population studied, no difference in HbA1c was observed before (8.5 ± 1.4% [69.6 ± 15.0 mmol/mol]), during (8.5 ± 1.4 [69.4 ± 15.4]), or after (8.5 ± 1.4% [69.6 ± 15.0]) summer vacation. Similarly, as shown in the Table 1, there were no differences in HbA1c levels after stratifying by age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, and device use. Only ∼24% had an HbA1c of ≤7.5% (58 mmol/mol) within each time period.
Seasonal HbA1c averages by demographic characteristics
. | Prior to start of summer vacation . | End of summer vacation . | Back in school . | P . |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age | ||||
8 to <13 years (n = 778) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.0 ± 11.7) | 8.3 ± 1.2 (66.8 ± 12.6) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.3 ± 11.7) | 0.61 |
13 to <18 years (n = 1,194) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.9 ± 16.4) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.1 ± 16.8) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.8 ± 16.5) | 0.15 |
Sex | ||||
Female (n = 1,001) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.5) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.9 ± 15.3) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.3) | 0.81 |
Male (n = 971) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.0 ± 14.5) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (68.9 ± 15.5) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.1 ± 14.7) | 0.61 |
Race/ethnicity | ||||
White non-Hispanic (n = 1,561) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.2 ± 14.1) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.3 ± 14.5) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.5 ± 14.0) | 0.63 |
African American (n = 95) | 9.7 ± 1.7 (83.0 ± 18.7) | 9.6 ± 1.7 (81.6 ± 18.9) | 9.8 ± 1.6 (83.8 ± 18.0) | 0.56 |
Hispanic or Latino (n = 160) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (72.1 ± 16.2) | 8.7 ± 1.6 (71.8 ± 17.7) | 8.7 ± 1.6 (71.9 ± 17.4) | 0.78 |
Other (n = 150) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.8 ± 15.8) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.2 ± 15.2) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.1 ± 14.1) | 0.42 |
Region | ||||
Midwest (n = 480) | 8.6 ± 1.3 (70.1 ± 13.8) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.0 ± 14.8) | 8.6 ± 1.3 (70.4 ± 14.0) | 0.59 |
Northeast (n = 755) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.8 ± 14.8) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.5 ± 15.1) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.7 ± 15.2) | 0.81 |
South (n = 242) | 8.6 ± 1.5 (71.0 ± 16.4) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.3 ± 15.8) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.5 ± 15.9) | 0.81 |
West (n = 495) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.6 ± 15.7) | 8.5 ± 1.5 (69.3 ± 16.1) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.3 ± 15.1) | 0.76 |
Insulin delivery method | ||||
Pump (n = 1,299) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.2 ± 11.9) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.1 ± 11.7) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.1 ± 11.7) | 0.95 |
Injection (n = 658) | 9.1 ± 1.6 (76.0 ± 18.0) | 9.1 ± 1.7 (75.6 ± 19.0) | 9.1 ± 1.6 (76.2 ± 18.0) | 0.39 |
Continuous glucose monitor use | ||||
Yes (n = 163) | 8.1 ± 1.1 (64.9 ± 12.4) | 8.1 ± 1.0 (64.6 ± 11.5) | 8.0 ± 1.1 (64.0 ± 12.2) | 0.83 |
No (n = 1,809) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.0 ± 15.2) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.8 ± 15.6) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.1) | 0.45 |
. | Prior to start of summer vacation . | End of summer vacation . | Back in school . | P . |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age | ||||
8 to <13 years (n = 778) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.0 ± 11.7) | 8.3 ± 1.2 (66.8 ± 12.6) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.3 ± 11.7) | 0.61 |
13 to <18 years (n = 1,194) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.9 ± 16.4) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.1 ± 16.8) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (71.8 ± 16.5) | 0.15 |
Sex | ||||
Female (n = 1,001) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.5) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.9 ± 15.3) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.3) | 0.81 |
Male (n = 971) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.0 ± 14.5) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (68.9 ± 15.5) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.1 ± 14.7) | 0.61 |
Race/ethnicity | ||||
White non-Hispanic (n = 1,561) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.2 ± 14.1) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.3 ± 14.5) | 8.4 ± 1.3 (68.5 ± 14.0) | 0.63 |
African American (n = 95) | 9.7 ± 1.7 (83.0 ± 18.7) | 9.6 ± 1.7 (81.6 ± 18.9) | 9.8 ± 1.6 (83.8 ± 18.0) | 0.56 |
Hispanic or Latino (n = 160) | 8.7 ± 1.5 (72.1 ± 16.2) | 8.7 ± 1.6 (71.8 ± 17.7) | 8.7 ± 1.6 (71.9 ± 17.4) | 0.78 |
Other (n = 150) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.8 ± 15.8) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.2 ± 15.2) | 8.5 ± 1.3 (69.1 ± 14.1) | 0.42 |
Region | ||||
Midwest (n = 480) | 8.6 ± 1.3 (70.1 ± 13.8) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.0 ± 14.8) | 8.6 ± 1.3 (70.4 ± 14.0) | 0.59 |
Northeast (n = 755) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.8 ± 14.8) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.5 ± 15.1) | 8.4 ± 1.4 (68.7 ± 15.2) | 0.81 |
South (n = 242) | 8.6 ± 1.5 (71.0 ± 16.4) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.3 ± 15.8) | 8.7 ± 1.4 (71.5 ± 15.9) | 0.81 |
West (n = 495) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.6 ± 15.7) | 8.5 ± 1.5 (69.3 ± 16.1) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.3 ± 15.1) | 0.76 |
Insulin delivery method | ||||
Pump (n = 1,299) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.2 ± 11.9) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.1 ± 11.7) | 8.2 ± 1.1 (66.1 ± 11.7) | 0.95 |
Injection (n = 658) | 9.1 ± 1.6 (76.0 ± 18.0) | 9.1 ± 1.7 (75.6 ± 19.0) | 9.1 ± 1.6 (76.2 ± 18.0) | 0.39 |
Continuous glucose monitor use | ||||
Yes (n = 163) | 8.1 ± 1.1 (64.9 ± 12.4) | 8.1 ± 1.0 (64.6 ± 11.5) | 8.0 ± 1.1 (64.0 ± 12.2) | 0.83 |
No (n = 1,809) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.0 ± 15.2) | 8.5 ± 1.4 (69.8 ± 15.6) | 8.6 ± 1.4 (70.1 ± 15.1) | 0.45 |
Data are mean ± SD % (mmol/mol), unless stated otherwise.
In summary, these data do not support the conventional wisdom that the changes in activity patterns and mealtimes during summer vacation are associated with a worsening of control in school-aged children with type 1 diabetes. As the T1DX is a contemporary cohort utilizing modern-day methodologies for diabetes management, our results are likely more generalizable than older, smaller studies. It has previously been postulated that there is worsening of glycemic control in winter months, and some have suggested this was correlated with either lower temperatures or greater variability in temperature (4,5). However, there were no differences in HbA1c levels in the four regions (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West) of the country, despite the marked differences in regional climates. Application of our findings may be limited in minority patients as the cohort studied was predominately non-Hispanic white; yet, the demographics of our cohort are consistent with the epidemiology of the disease. However, our findings highlight the need for improving control in most youngsters with type 1 diabetes regardless of the time of year as targeted HbA1c levels of ≤7.5% were not achieved in the vast majority of youngsters. It will be important to determine whether new treatments for the management of type 1 diabetes, such as closed-loop insulin delivery systems, will allow a greater percentage of patients to achieve and maintain target HbA1c levels throughout the year.
Article Information
Acknowledgments. The authors thank the thousands of patients and families who have contributed to the T1DX Registry as well as the numerous investigators.
Funding. The T1DX is supported through the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust.
Duality of Interest. J.L.S.’s nonprofit employer has received research funding from Medtronic. R.W.B.’s nonprofit employer has received consultant payments on his behalf from Sanofi and Animas and a research grant from Novo Nordisk with no personal compensation to R.W.B. W.V.T. has received consultancy payments from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Medtronic. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Author Contributions. J.L.S. contributed to data interpretation and wrote and edited the manuscript. C.T.B. performed statistical analyses and wrote and edited the manuscript. K.M.M., R.W.B., and W.V.T. contributed to data interpretation and reviewed and edited the manuscript. R.W.B. is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.