Empirical Evidence and Children

¶ … Daneman's "Treating hypoglycemia in children with diabetes: a simple game of "skittles." This article explores original research (based on empirical evidence) regarding the most effective means of raising the blood sugar level in diabetics. It considers this research for a very specific population, children who are afflicted with type 1 diabetes. The results of the research described within this article yield clinical findings with a minimal amount of ambiguity.

As such, they are able to provide a substantial amount of insight into the practice of nursing for this population and prove that non-traditional sources of sugar are better than natural sugar for preventing -- or even correcting -- episodes of hypoglycemia within the identified population group. This article provides a fairly detailed review of research conducted by Husband et al. within the same issue of the publication in which Daneman (2015) is writing. The goal of that research was to identify a readily accessible means of assisting children with hypoglycemia.

The research primarily focused on three different types of sugar which are associated with increasing or decreasing blood sugar levels as needed. These include fructose, glucose, and surose. What is interesting about these three sugar types is that fructose has traditionally been considered the most preferable type of sugar since it is found in abundance in natural fruits (and even some vegetables).

Therefore, the researchers tested its effect on children with hypoglycemia alongside the other two forms of sugar, which are typically discouraged because they are associated with artificial foods such as candy and other forms of adulterated nutrients readily available today. The nature of the research performed was fairly straightforward. The researchers were able to monitor the number of low-blood sugar level events which occurred to a population of children in approximately 15 weeks. Based on those events, they determined the effect produced by the treatment options.

Glucose was administered in the form of tablets while the candy Skittles served as the means of delivering the subjects surose. Fructose was administered in the form of Fruit to Go (Daneman, 2010, p. 150). As previously mentioned those treatment options included the three different types of sugar. However, there were some questions regarding the method which arose in the way the researchers conducted their empirical evidence.

When treating children with glucose, for instance, the researchers used different amounts based on the subjects attempt to satisfy any sort of hunger at the time. One must wonder if the results would have been different had those amounts been standardized among the participants. Additionally, the researchers did not distinguish between the types of hypoglycemia from which their subjects suffered. It would have been interesting to determine if their were any differences on the effects of symptomatic versus asymptomatic hypoglycemia (Daneman, 2010, p. 150).

Despite these considerations, the clinical findings of the study were certainly conclusive: "the mean change in blood glucose from pre- to post treatment was 2.47 mmol/l for glucose, 2.45 mmol/l for sucrose and 1.30 mmol/l for fructose" (Daneman, 2010, p. 150). These results indicate the effectiveness of glucose and sucrose in affecting positive change for those afflicted with a mild form of hypoglycemia was significantly greater than that produced by the consumption of fructose. In fact, the change produced by glucose was nearly double that of the change produced by fructose.

The significance of these findings to the practice of nursing are myriad. Firstly, the indicate the most efficacious means of preventing, or perhaps mitigating, an instance of hypoglycemia. Thus, nurses can incorporate this evidence into their own practice, and further the base of knowledge for the evidence-based practice of this profession. Additionally, these results help to undo a stigma which has plagued people for quite some time. The axiom is that fruits and vegetables (those natural sources of fructose) are healthy for one.

Moreover, the conviction is they contain sugar but that which is supposedly 'good' sugar. This idea is disproved by the study. Similarly, the inverse of the this idea is corroborated by this work. There is.