The findings of the current study suggested that both the family support scores and the amount of time spent watching TV are related to sleep disorders. However, sleep quality was not associated with the HbA1c level or the time spent on either video games or the Internet. Family support scores were negatively correlated with HbA1c levels and the time since T1D diagnosis. Patients with higher family support scores attended follow-up sessions more frequently.
The current body of evidence suggests that sleep and glycemic control have a bidirectional connection; poor glycemic control causes sleep problems and sleep problems interfere with glucose homeostasis (7, 9–11). According to two meta-analyses, the direct effect of sleep characteristics on glycemic management in T1D adolescents and children is not well established (9, 10). Bahadur et al. compared sleep and behavior problems between T1D children and non-diabetic controls. They reported that T1D children had a shorter sleep time and experienced more daytime sleepiness compared with their control group. However, this study found no association between sleep parameters and glycemic control (22). Alder et al. also discovered no significant association between HbA1c levels and sleep in T1D children and adolescents (23). Similarly, our results indicated that HbA1c values do not significantly vary between different sleep disorder groups.
On the other hand, numerous studies stated that poor sleep negatively affects glycemic control in T1D patients. A systematic review in 2021 demonstrated that poor sleep quality and irregular sleep patterns were related to higher HbA1c and suboptimal T1D self-care measurements (3). Moreover, both short and long sleep duration were linked to poor self-management behaviors (10), impaired adherence to glucose monitoring, and uncontrolled HbA1c levels (3). Berk et al. followed 61 T1D patients in the 6–16 age group for one year. They reported higher HbA1c values in patients with higher sleep disorders (P = 0.02) (24). Frye et al. discovered that shorter sleep duration is linked with an elevated HbA1c level and poor diabetes self-care behaviors. However, additional analysis revealed that the relationship between HbA1c and sleep duration was mediated by self-measurement of blood glucose (25). These findings underline the mediating impact of self-management activities on the interaction between sleep and glycemic control of T1D youths. In fact, enhanced sleep could be accompanied by improved self-management behaviors which subsequently contribute to better glycemic control (3, 10). However, our study did not identify any significant link between glycemic control and sleep.
Digital device use adversely affects sleep characteristics in children and adolescents (26). A study in 2010 found that the average overall time spent on screen devices was approximately 3.5 hours for male and 2.5 hours for female youths with T1D (27). The participants of our study spent approximately three times more hours a day on electronic devices. This may point out the increasing trend of electronic media use among children and adolescents. Huert-Uribe et al. performed a meta-analysis to evaluate physical activity and sedentary behavior in adolescents with T1D. This study discovered that T1D adolescents are more sedentary compared with healthy peers (4). This could be related to the fear of hypoglycemia and lack of both motivation and time in T1D patients (28). Sedentary behaviors, including screen use, have been linked to higher values of HbA1c (5). These findings highlight the concerning impact of sedentary activities on glycemic control in youth with T1D which contributes to serious complications. Thus, it seems crucial to reverse sedentary behaviors and increase physical activity among adolescents with T1D to improve their cardiovascular profile and overall health (4). To address this issue, diabetes caregivers should focus on decreasing the duration of screen use as a leading contributor to a sedentary lifestyle. The American Diabetes Association emphasizes reducing sedentary activities, such as watching TV and using computer, to the greatest extent and taking breaks frequently by engaging in simple physical exercises (e.g., walking and standing). These feasible interventions may improve the glycemic status of diabetic patients (29). A randomized controlled trial study of T1D adults revealed that PSQI scores decreased significantly (21.4%; P-value < 0.001) after 6 weeks of increased physical activity (28). In a similar study on T1D children, sleep habits improved in patients with regular physical activity (30). A study of 45 T1D teenagers revealed a negative correlation between the time spent on sedentary activities and sleep duration (P < 0.01; r = -0.64) (31). Compared with these findings, the results of our study suggested that individuals who spent more time watching TV tended to experience more sleep disorders. Similarly, a published study illustrated that the duration of nocturnal sleep was notably shorter in teens who spent over 2 hours watching TV or had late bedtimes (32). Sleep disorders such as late bedtime could be associated with more sedentary behaviors in adolescents with T1D which may lead to uncontrolled blood glucose levels (25). These findings highlight the impact of a sedentary lifestyle on T1D patients’ quality of life, particularly their sleep quality.
A meta-analysis revealed that greater sedentary behavior, with the exception of screen time spent completing homework, was associated with worse HbA1c levels in T1D youths. Personality traits related to engaging in schoolwork are accompanied by promoted self-care behaviors and better glycemic control, which could explain this finding (10). Calella et al. investigated the physical activity and lifestyle of T1D adolescents in Italy. They found a positive association between overall screen time (TV, the Internet, and video games) and HbA1c levels. This study also indicated that adolescents with T1D spent approximately eight hours on screen-based devices daily and that their level of physical activity was lower than the minimum standard recommendations (12). Similarly, the participants in our study had a mean overall screen time of approximately 9 hours daily. These findings highlight the necessity of improving healthcare measures for T1D adolescents to modify sedentary habits and enhance physical activity to achieve optimum glycemic control.
Family members of younger pediatric T1D patients are responsible for monitoring the blood glucose levels and supervising the insulin injection (6). Adolescents are more vulnerable to glycemic deterioration after the gradual transition to self-management and parental involvement remains essential for desirable diabetes management (6). Perceived family social support enhances diabetes self-care measurements and self-efficacy in youths with T1D (33). A systematic review revealed that the involvement of parents in the management of diabetes enhances glycemic control in adolescents with T1D (6). Similarly, our results indicated that T1D adolescents with greater family support had lower HbA1c values and attended follow-up sessions at the diabetes clinic more frequently. This may highlight the significance of family support in promoting the adherence of T1D teens to their treatment.
A previous study in Iran reported that perceived family support was not associated with the age of T1D patients. However, both HbA1c levels and T1D duration were not related to family support contrary to our study (34). A study of 150 T1D adolescents revealed that the involvement of parents in diabetes care declined significantly with increasing age (P < 0.01) (35). Hanna et al. reported that older adolescents with T1D perceived lower levels of parental autonomy support (P < 0.001) (36). AlHaidar et al. conducted a cross-sectional study to evaluate family support in T1D adolescents. They demonstrated that older adolescents perceived significantly lower levels of various family support elements. However, the time spent after the diagnosis of T1D and the HbA1c values were only correlated with family supervision (r = -0.647; P = 0.012) and critical situation support (r = 0.335; P = 0.017), respectively (37). These findings highlight the inconsistency of data on the link between family support and T1D adolescents’ characteristics and outcomes.
A longitudinal study on T1D adolescents and their parents indicated that parental adherence and involvement declined significantly over time (38). Family support was negatively associated with time since T1D diagnosis in our study but not with teen’s age. Parental burnout might explain this contradiction. Parents of diabetic children tend to experience burnout and characterize it as feeling grief for losing a normal life or feeling powerless to manage diabetes (39). Some background factors, such as socioeconomic status and limited leisure time, aggravate parental burnout (40). Hence, it could be practical for diabetes clinicians to support parents psychologically. This subsequently contributes to enhanced family support and improved attitudes towards diabetes management among T1D adolescents.
Although higher family support scores were associated with enhanced sleep quality in our results, the role of parental supervision in adolescents’ sleep health should be taken into consideration. According to Bergner et al., caregivers of T1D adolescents take some strategies to improve the quality of their teens’ sleep. This study mentioned setting sleep curfews (e.g., early bedtime) and eliminating digital devices from teenagers’ bedrooms as the most common strategies (41). However, parental interventions should not lead to prebedtime arguments, since such conflicts deteriorate sleep quality in children and adolescents (42).
Limitations
The cross-sectional design and lack of a control group influence the generalizability of the current study and limit the interpretability of the results. The data on the time spent on sedentary behaviors were obtained through self-reports of patients and their parents, which might lead to misconclusion. The association between sleep quality and daily glycemic variability is unclear since HbA1c is not an accurate predictor. Further studies should consider implementing continuous glucose monitoring to address this issue.