Clinical Focus


  • Pediatrics

Academic Appointments


Professional Education


  • Medical Education:Morehouse School of Medicine Office of the Registrar (2011) GA
  • Residency:Lucille Packard Children's Hospital/Stanford Hospital and Clinics (2014)
  • Board Certification: Pediatrics, American Board of Pediatrics (2014)

All Publications


  • Stabilization of glycemic control and improved quality of life using a shared medical appointment model in adolescents with type 1 diabetes in suboptimal control. Pediatric diabetes Floyd, B. D., Block, J. M., Buckingham, B. B., Ly, T., Foster, N., Wright, R., Mueller, C. L., Hood, K. K., Shah, A. C. 2016

    Abstract

    Declining glycemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D) during adolescence persists despite treatment advances. Non-adherence, peer relations, diabetes burnout, risk taking, transition to autonomy, family conflict, and poor quality of life (QOL) are recognized barriers. Shared medical appointments (SMAs) in adolescent T1D may offer benefits, but data are limited. Our objective was to determine whether SMAs, with multi-component interventions utilizing multidisciplinary teams, improve glycemic control and psychosocial outcomes in poorly controlled adolescent T1D.SMAs focused on self-management, communication skills, goal setting, glucose pattern recognition, and peer/diabetes team support. SMAs included: individual history and physical, labs, surveys, multidisciplinary educational ice breakers, group session, and individual wrap up. Outcomes were QOL, adherence, and retrospective and prospective glycemic control. Three to six subjects and families came to 3 SMAs and 1 individual appointment every 3 months over 9 months.A total of 37 English speaking subjects, ages 12-16 yrs, with T1D ≥ 1 year, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 7.5-11% enrolled. Thirty-two subjects attended 75% of visits, meeting inclusion criteria.HbA1c worsened in the 9 months before study (ΔHbA1c= 0.7 ± 1.2; p < 0.01), but remained stable during study (ΔHbA1c = 0.01 ± 1.2; p > 0.05). There were significant improvements in overall QOL (p = 0.005), school function (p = 0.006), psychosocial function (p = 0.008), barriers (p = 0.02), adherence (p = 0.01), and communication (p = 0.02). Improvements in school function and communication reached clinical significance.SMAs are feasible replacements to individual appointments in adolescent T1D, stabilizing glycemic control and improving QOL. Randomized controlled trials with optimizations are needed to further explore and refine this intervention.

    View details for DOI 10.1111/pedi.12373

    View details for PubMedID 26919322

  • Comparative analysis of the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes mellitus. Journal of diabetes science and technology Floyd, B., Chandra, P., Hall, S., Phillips, C., Alema-Mensah, E., Strayhorn, G., Ofili, E. O., Umpierrez, G. E. 2012; 6 (5): 1094-1102

    Abstract

    Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) have been proven effective in improving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and in reducing hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). It is not clear, however, if CGM provides further efficacy and safety benefits beyond SMBG in the management of T1DM.MEDLINE (1966-November 2009), COCHRANE REGISTRY (all years), and EMBASE (1980-November 2009), and article bibliographies were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of CGM in patients with T1DM, with clinical outcomes, including HbA1c and hypoglycemia and/or hyperglycemia.Fourteen RCTs met eligibility criteria [n = 1188 patients, 97.4% with T1DM, age 29.0 ± 14.3 years, diabetes duration 11.7 ± 7.0 years, and baseline HbA1c 8.3 ± 0.8% (mean ± standard deviation)]. Compared with SMBG, the use of CGM was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1c [-0.3% (confidence interval: 0.4, -0.2), p < .0001]. The number of hypoglycemic events was not significantly different between the CGM and SMBG groups (0.52 ± 0.52 versus 0.52 ± 0.63 events/day, p = .5), but duration of hypoglycemia was shorter for the CGM group (75 ± 39 versus 89 ± 19 min/day), with an incremental reduction of hypoglycemia duration of -15.2 min/day, p < .0001. Continuous glucose monitoring also resulted in a shorter duration of hyperglycemia than SMBG (172 ± 125 versus 217 ± 152 min/day, p = .04).The use of CGM is associated with improvement in metabolic control in T1DM, with significant short- and long-term reductions in HbA1c and reduction in the duration of periods of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia versus SMBG.

    View details for PubMedID 23063035