Does self-monitoring of blood glucose levels improve dietary compliance for obese patients with type II diabetes?

The use of conversation maps in the metabolic control of diabetes in Brazilians: a randomized clinical trial

Objective

To evaluate effects of an educative intervention over the self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) at home for metabolic control.

Method

A total of 91 people with diabetes participated, recruited from the home capillary blood glycemia self-monitoring program. Two groups of participants were formed: one group participated in the SMBG program at home and with usual care (control group), while the other group participated in the SMBG at home and with educative intervention (intervention group). In total there were 12 meetings, three for each conversation map in the control of diabetes, during four months in 2011 and 2012. For all the analysis, a significance statistical level of 5% (p ≤ 0.05) was adopted.

Results

Most part of participants were females, married, with an average age of 62.1 years old and schooling from four to seven years of study. In the intervention group, an improvement was observed in the following measures: body mass index, abdominal circumference, diastolic blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglycerides. The control group showed improvement in measures of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose, HDL cholesterol and LDL cholesterol. Moreover, an increase on the values of glycated hemoglobin was observed in both groups.

Conclusion

It was observed that there was not statistical significant improvement of the metabolic control. However, it was possible to confirm that an educative intervention for SMBG at home presented a clinical significance, which in turn, resonates in a special way on the health of participants.

Promotora Diabetes Intervention for Mexican Americans

PURPOSE

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to determine the effectiveness of an intervention led by promotoras (community lay workers) on the glycemic control, diabetes knowledge, and diabetes health beliefs of Mexican Americans with type 2 diabetes living in a major city on the Texas-Mexico border.

METHODS

One hundred fifty Mexican American participants were recruited at a Catholic faith-based clinic and randomized into 2 groups. Personal characteristics, acculturation, baseline A1C level, diabetes knowledge, and diabetes health beliefs were measured. The intervention was culturally specific and consisted of participative group education, telephone contact, and follow-up using inspirational faith-based health behavior change postcards. The A1C levels, diabetes knowledge, and diabetes health beliefs were measured 3 and 6 months postbaseline, and the mean change between the groups was analyzed.

RESULTS

The 80% female sample, with a mean age of 58 years, demonstrated low acculturation, income, education, health insurance coverage, and strong Catholicism. No significant changes were noted at the 3-month assessment, but the mean change of the A1C levels, F(1, 148) = 10.28, P < .001, and the diabetes knowledge scores, F(1, 148) = 9.0, P < .002, of the intervention group improved significantly at 6 months, adjusting for health insurance coverage. The health belief scores decreased in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention resulted in decreased A1C levels and increased diabetes knowledge, suggesting that using promotoras as part of an interdisciplinary team can result in positive outcomes for Mexican Americans who have type 2 diabetes. Clinical implications and recommendations for future research are suggested.

Interventions to enhance adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults

BACKGROUND

It has been recognized that poor adherence can be a serious risk to the health and wellbeing of patients, and greater adherence to dietary advice is a critical component in preventing and managing chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for enhancing adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases up to 29 September 2010: The Cochrane Library (issue 9 2010), PubMed, EMBASE (Embase.com), CINAHL (Ebsco) and PsycINFO (PsycNET) with no language restrictions. We also reviewed: a) recent years of relevant conferences, symposium and colloquium proceedings and abstracts; b) web-based registries of clinical trials; and c) the bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated interventions enhancing adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults. Studies were eligible if the primary outcome was the client's adherence to dietary advice. We defined 'client' as an adult participating in a chronic disease prevention or chronic disease management study involving dietary advice.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the studies. They also assessed the risk of bias and extracted data using a modified version of the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group data extraction template. Any discrepancies in judgement were resolved by discussion and consensus, or with a third review author. Because the studies differed widely with respect to interventions, measures of diet adherence, dietary advice, nature of the chronic diseases and duration of interventions and follow-up, we conducted a qualitative analysis. We classified included studies according to the function of the intervention and present results in a narrative table using vote counting for each category of intervention.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies involving 9445 participants. Among studies that measured diet adherence outcomes between an intervention group and a control/usual care group, 32 out of 123 diet adherence outcomes favoured the intervention group, 4 favoured the control group whereas 62 had no significant difference between groups (assessment was impossible for 25 diet adherence outcomes since data and/or statistical analyses needed for comparison between groups were not provided). Interventions shown to improve at least one diet adherence outcome are: telephone follow-up, video, contract, feedback, nutritional tools and more complex interventions including multiple interventions. However, these interventions also shown no difference in some diet adherence outcomes compared to a control/usual care group making inconclusive results about the most effective intervention to enhance dietary advice. The majority of studies reporting a diet adherence outcome favouring the intervention group compared to the control/usual care group in the short-term also reported no significant effect at later time points. Studies investigating interventions such as a group session, individual session, reminders, restriction and behaviour change techniques reported no diet adherence outcome showing a statistically significant difference favouring the intervention group. Finally, studies were generally of short duration and low quality, and adherence measures varied widely.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for further, long-term, good-quality studies using more standardized and validated measures of adherence to identify the interventions that should be used in practice to enhance adherence to dietary advice in the context of a variety of chronic diseases.

Effects of a structured self-monitoring of blood glucose method on patient self-management behavior and metabolic outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on patient self-management behavior and metabolic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

From January to June 2009, 30 patients with basic diabetes education were followed for a period of 90 days. To provide assessment of glycemic control and frequency of dysglycemia, patients, underwent 3 consecutive days of seven-point SMBG during each month for 3 consecutive months, using the ACCU-CHEK 360° View tool. Glucose profiles of the first and third month were used for comparison.

RESULTS

Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) improved significantly during the 90-day period in all patients [confidence interval (CI) 95%, 0.32-1.64%, p < .05] and those with poor metabolic control (group B; CI 95%, 0.86-2.64%, p < .05). Mean blood glucose (MBG) values decreased significantly in group B (CI 95%, 0.56-24.78 mg/dl, p < .05) and all cases (CI 95%, 1.61-19.73 mg/dl, p < .05). Meanwhile, there was an average decrease of 15.7 mg/dl in fasting blood sugar (FBS) levels in the whole subjects. Mean postprandial blood glucose levels (MPP) decreased by 19.3 and 11.3 mg/dl in group B and in all cases, respectively. However, there were no significant changes in HbA1c, MBG, FBS, and MPP in people with good metabolic control.

CONCLUSION

A structured SMBG program improves HbA1c, FBS, MPP, and MBG in people with poorly controlled diabetes. This improvement shows the importance of patient self-management behavior on metabolic outcomes in T2DM.

On what evidence-base do we recommend self-monitoring of blood glucose?

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) has been considered one major breakthrough in diabetes therapy because, for the first time, patients were able to determine their blood glucose levels during daily life. It seems obvious that this must be of advantage to disease management and clinical outcome, but it has become a nightmare for those trying to provide evidence. Randomised controlled trials have yielded inconsistent results on a benefit of SMBG-based treatment strategies not only in type 2 but - surprisingly - also in type 1 and gestational diabetes. Despite this, SMBG is being considered indispensible in intensive insulin treatment, but is being debated for other clinical settings. When considering the non-RCT based reasons for recommending SMBG in type 1 and gestational diabetes it becomes apparent that the same reasons also apply to type 2 diabetes.

[Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetic patients non treated with insulin]

The utility of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and in those with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin is well accepted, however, consensus on whether people with type 2 diabetes who are not taking insulin should monitor their blood glucose levels has not been reached. The aim of the present review was to analyze data available on SMGB in type 2 diabetic patients and subsequently elaborate recommendations for its use. Nine clinical trials and 5 systematic reviews were consulted. Furthermore, guides from scientific societies were also consulted. I can conclude, under my personal point of view that SMBG must be introducing as part of a structured education programme for those newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes even in those only treated with life-style modifications provides people with the opportunity to learn about the impact that food and physical activity have on their glycaemia control. These patients should monitor their blood glucose pre- and post-prandial at least once per month. The frequency should increase when values of glycosilate haemoglobin are out of the objectives.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycaemic control in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched from inception to January 2009 for randomised controlled trials comparing SMBG with non-SMBG or more frequent SMBG with less intensive SMBG. Electronic searches were supplemented by manual searching of reference lists and reviews. The comparison of SMBG with non-SMBG was the primary, the comparison of more frequent SMBG with less intensive SMBG the secondary analysis. Stratified analyses were performed to evaluate modifying factors.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)), secondary outcomes included fasting glucose and the occurrence of hypoglycaemia. Using random effects models a weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for HbA(1c) and a risk ratio (RR) was calculated for hypoglycaemia. Due to considerable heterogeneity, no combined estimate was computed for fasting glucose.

RESULTS

Fifteen trials (3270 patients) were included in the analyses. SMBG was associated with a larger reduction in HbA(1c) compared with non-SMBG (WMD -0.31%, 95% confidence interval -0.44 to -0.17). The beneficial effect associated with SMBG was not attenuated over longer follow-up. SMBG significantly increased the probability of detecting a hypoglycaemia (RR 2.10, 1.37 to 3.22). More frequent SMBG did not result in significant changes of HbA(1c) compared with less intensive SMBG (WMD -0.21%, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

SMBG compared with non-SMBG is associated with a significantly improved glycaemic control in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes. The added value of more frequent SMBG compared with less intensive SMBG remains uncertain.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose as part of the integral care of type 2 diabetes

Results from landmark diabetes studies have established A1C as the gold standard for assessing long-term glycemic control. However, A1C does not provide "real-time" information about individual hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic excursions. Real-time information provided by self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) represents an important adjunct to A1C, because it can differentiate fasting, preprandial, and postprandial hyperglycemia; detect glycemic excursions; identify hypoglycemia; and provide immediate feedback about the effect of food choices, physical activity, and medication on glycemic control. The importance of SMBG is widely appreciated and recommended as a core component of management in patients with type 1 or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, as well as in diabetic pregnancy, for both women with pregestational type 1 and gestational diabetes. Nevertheless, SMBG in management of non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetic patients continues to be debated. Results from clinical trials are inconclusive, and reviews fail to reach an agreement, mainly because of methodological problems. Carefully designed large-scale studies on diverse patient populations with type 2 diabetes with the follow-up period to investigate long-term effects of SMBG in patients with type 2 diabetes should be carried out to clarify how to make the best use of SMBG, in which patients, and under what conditions.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in diabetes: is it worth it?

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is advocated as a valuable aid in the management of diabetes. The volume and cost of monitoring continues to increase. SMBG has a number of theoretical advantages/disadvantages which might impact on treatment, outcome and wellbeing. Investigating and quantifying the effect of self-monitoring in a condition where self-management plays a central role poses major methodological difficulties because of the need to minimize confounding factors. Despite the absence of definitive evidence, some situations where monitoring is generally accepted to be beneficial include patients on insulin, during pregnancy, in patients with hypoglycaemia unawareness and while driving. An area of controversy is the role of monitoring in non-insulin-requiring type-2 diabetes where observational and controlled studies give conflicting results. The available evidence does not support the general use of monitoring by all patients with type-2 diabetes, although further research is needed to identify specific subgroups of patients or specific situations where monitoring might be useful. The best use of SMBG in patients with type-2 diabetes might be for those receiving insulin and those on sulphonylurea drugs. The impact of monitoring on patient wellbeing must also be considered, with some studies suggesting adverse psychological effects. Given the large increase in the prevalence of type-2 diabetes, it will be important to define the role of SMBG so that resources can be used appropriately. Presently, the widespread use of SMBG (particularly in type-2 diabetes patients) is a good example of self-monitoring that was adopted in advance of robust evidence of its clinical efficacy.

Blood glucose monitoring is associated with better glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: a database study

BACKGROUND

The value of self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) in type 2 diabetes is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To determine SMBG testing rates are positively associated with glycemic control in veterans on oral hypoglycemic agents (OHA).

DESIGN

Observational database study.

SUBJECTS

Southwestern Healthcare Network veterans taking OHA in 2002 and followed through the end of 2004.

MEASUREMENTS

OHA and glucose test strip (GTS) prescriptions were derived from pharmacy files. Subjects were categorized into five groups according to their end-of-study treatment status: group 1 (no medication changes), group 2 (increased doses of initial OHA), group 3 (started new OHA), group 4 (both OHA interventions), and group 5 (initiated insulin). We then used multiple linear regression analyses to examine the relationship between the SMBG testing rate and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) within each group.

RESULTS

We evaluated 5,862 patients with a mean follow-up duration of 798 +/- 94 days. Overall, 44.2% received GTS. Ultimately, 47% of subjects ended up in group 1, 21% in group 2, 9% in group 3, 8% in group 4, and 16% in group 5. A univariate analysis showed no association between the SMBG testing rate and HbA1c. However, after stratifying by group and adjusting for initial OHA dose, we found that more frequent testing was associated with a significantly lower HbA1c in groups 1, 4, and 5. The effect ranged from -0.22% to -0.94% for every ten GTS/week.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher SMBG testing rates were associated with lower HbA1c, but only when stratifying the analyses to control for treatment intensification.

Integrating co-morbid depression and chronic physical disease management: identifying and resolving failures in self-regulation

Research suggests that treatments for depression among individuals with chronic physical disease do not improve disease outcomes significantly, and chronic disease management programs do not necessarily improve mood. For individuals experiencing co-morbid depression and chronic physical disease, demands on the self-regulation system are compounded, leading to a rapid depletion of self-regulatory resources. Because disease and depression management are not integrated, patients lack the understanding needed to prioritize self-regulatory goals in a way that makes disease and depression management synergistic. A framework in which the management of co-morbidity is considered alongside the management of either condition alone offers benefits to researchers and practitioners and may help improve clinical outcomes.

Consensus report of the coalition for clinical research-self-monitoring of blood glucose

The Coalition for Clinical Research-Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Scientific Board, a group of nine academic clinicians and scientists from the United States and Europe, convened in San Francisco, California, on June 11-12, 2008, to discuss the appropriate uses of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and the measures necessary to accurately assess the potential benefit of this practice in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Thirteen consultants from the United States, Europe, and Canada from academia, practice, and government also participated and contributed based on their fields of expertise. These experts represent a range of disciplines that include adult endocrinology, pediatric endocrinology, health education, mathematics, statistics, psychology, nutrition, exercise physiology, and nursing. This coalition was organized by Diabetes Technology Management, Inc. Among the participants, there was consensus that: protocols assessing the performance of SMBG in noninsulin treated T2DM must provide the SMBG intervention subjects with blood glucose (BG) goals and instructions on how to respond to BG data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs);intervention subjects in clinical trials of SMBG-driven interventions must aggressively titrate their therapeutic responses or lifestyle changes in response to hyperglycemia;control subjects in clinical trials of SMBG must be isolated from SMBG-driven interventions and not be contaminated by physician experience with study subjects receiving a SMBG intervention;the best endpoints to measure in a clinical trial of SMBG in T2DM include delta Hemoglobin A1c levels, hyperglycemic events, hypoglycemic events, time to titrate noninsulin therapy to a maximum necessary dosage, and quality of life indices;either individual randomization or cluster randomization may be appropriate methods for separating control subjects from SMBG intervention subjects, provided that precautions are taken to avoid bias and that the sample size is adequate;treatment algorithms for assessing SMBG in T2DM may include a dietary, exercise, and/or medication intervention, which are all titratable according to the SMBG values;the medical literature contains very little information about the performance of SMBG in T2DM from RCTs in which treatment algorithms were used for dysglycemic values; and research on the performance of SMBG in T2DM based on sound scientific principles and clinical practices is needed at this time.

Texas-Mexico Border Intervention by Promotores for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Purpose The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of a promotores-led diabetes self-management program by comparing the outcomes (knowledge, beliefs, and HbA1c level) of Mexican American patients with type 2 diabetes who received usual diabetic care in a wait-list control group to those who received self-management education and follow-up by promotores in consultation with clinic providers and staff.

Methods This randomized control study compared the results of 63 patients who attended a promotores-led culturally sensitive diabetes self-management course at a commu- nity clinic with 68 patients in a wait-list, usual-care control group. Participants were Mexican Americans with type 2 diabetes who were patients at the clinic and at least 18 years of age. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, the Diabetes Knowledge Questionnaire (DKQ), Health Beliefs Questionnaire (HBQ), and HbA1c levels (drawn by the clinic laboratory) were collected.

Results There was a significant improvement in the intervention group's DKQ scores over time and in treatment by time. The baseline HbA1c level was 7.49 and did not change over time in either group. The DKQ, HBQ, and HbA1c results were significantly affected by age; the DKQ and HbA1c were affected by years with diabetes.

Conclusions The promotores-led diabetes self-management course improved the knowledge of patients with diabetes. Participant baseline HbA1c level was close to therapeutic level (much lower than reported in previous studies), suggesting participants received good medical care within the community clinic.

Can we predict future improvement in glycaemic control?

AIMS

To determine the factors responsible for poor glycaemic control in diabetes and whether any such factors are associated with likely improvement in glycaemic control.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 130 diabetic patients with poor glycaemic control (HbA(1c )> or = 10.0%) with 1-year follow-up in a teaching hospital Diabetes Clinic. Changes in HbA(1c) were measured after 1 year.

RESULTS

Poor glycaemic control was attributed to one of 15 possible causes. Those cases due to recent diagnosis of diabetes, inadequate treatment with diet, oral glucose-lowering agents or insulin, exacerbation of co-existent medical problems, recent stressful life-events and missed clinic appointments were all associated with significant improvement in HbA(1c) at 12 months. Patients with low mood or alcohol excess, inadequate blood glucose monitoring, poor exercise/sedentary lifestyle, refusal to take tablets or underdosing and refusal to take insulin at all or to increase the dose were all associated with continuing poor glycaemic control at 12 months. The patients were divided almost equally between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with poor glycaemic control, it is possible by simple features identified at clinic to predict which individuals are likely to show improvement in control and which will not. These findings have not been reported previously and suggest that about half of individuals with poor control will improve within our current diabetes clinic practice. Additional strategies will be required to address those individuals who are not likely to respond.

Age-dependent difference in factors affecting choice of system for self-monitoring of blood glucose

To clarify factors determining the preference for a self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) system in patients with diabetes mellitus. A total of 52 Japanese inpatients with diabetes mellitus were recruited into a single-center trial. After the patients got used to one SMBG system, the SMBG system was substituted with another one of the three, and the subjects were given questionnaires. The following parameters were identified as independent factors associated with the preference of SMBG: display (P<0.0001), operation for inserting strips (P=0.0004), and lancing-device operation (P<0.05). When the subjects were divided according to age, the independent variables associated with overall preference in the older group (>or=60 years) were display (P=0.001) and procedure for detaching a used needle (P=0.01), whereas those in the younger group (age<60 years) were operation of the lancing device (P<0.0001), operation to apply blood to strip (P=0.001), and amount of blood (P=0.04). These data suggest that in elderly patients with diabetes, display and detachment of the needle are important factors affecting the choice of SMBG system, whereas younger subjects give weight to skin puncture-related issues in choosing an SMBG system.

Randomized studies are needed to assess the true role of self-monitoring of blood glucose in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes

Numerous trials have been conducted to assess the utility of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetic (T2DM) patients. Although recent meta-analyses support the benefits of SMBG, the clinical utility of SMBG in this population remains controversial due to a lack of large, randomized controlled trials. Much of the skepticism regarding SMBG in noninsulin-treated T2DM may stem from a misapplication or misunderstanding of the true role of SMBG. The benefits of SMBG are realized only when both the patient and the health care provider (HCP) know how and are willing to monitor, interpret, and respond appropriately to acute glucose excursions and patterns of glycemia identified through SMBG. Optimal utilization of SMBG requires that patients be trained and motivated to accurately perform SMBG at the time and frequency prescribed, accurately interpret the data they obtain, act upon the information when appropriate, and consistently document results for later review with their HCP. HCPS must be willing and able to routinely monitor SMBG data and make appropriate adjustments in therapy. Numerous studies are needed to evaluate the true value and utility of SMBG within the diverse T2DM population to ensure that resources for diabetes management can be used efficiently. This article identifies and discusses key factors to consider for the design of randomized studies that can provide a foundation upon which HCPs and health care systems may reevaluate their current strategies/protocols and incorporate the learnings into more effective approaches to patient care.

Assessing differential attrition in clinical trials: self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation and type II diabetes

Background

Analyzing drop out rates and when they occur may give important information about the patient characteristics and trial characteristics that affect the overall uptake of an intervention.

Methods

We searched Medline and the Cochrane library from the beginning of the databases to May 2006 for published systematic reviews that compared the effects of self-monitoring (self-testing) or self-management (self-testing and self-dosage) of oral anticoagulation or self-monitored blood glucose in type 2 diabetics who were not using insulin. We assessed all study withdrawals pre-randomization and post randomization and sought information on the reasons for discontinuation of all participants.

To measure the differential between groups in attrition we used the relative attrition (RA), which is equivalent to relative risk but uses attrition as the outcome (i.e. attrition in intervention group/attrition in control group). We determined the percentage drop outs for control and intervention groups and used DerSimonian and Laird random effects models to estimate a pooled relative attrition. L'abbe type plots created in R (version 2.0.2) were used to represent the difference in the relative attrition among the trials with 95% confidence areas and weights derived from the random effects model.

Results

With self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes, attrition ranged from 2.3% to 50.0% in the intervention groups and 0% to 40.4% in the control groups. There was no significant difference between the intervention and control, with an overall RA of 1.18 [95% CI, 0.70–2.01]. With self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation attrition ranged from 0% to 43.2% in the intervention groups and 0% to 21.4% in the control group. The RA was significantly greater in the intervention group, combined RA, 6.05 [95% CI, 2.53–14.49].

Conclusion

This paper demonstrates the use of relative attrition as a new tool in systematic review methodology which has the potential to identify patient, intervention and trial characteristics which influences attrition in trials.

Is self-monitoring of blood glucose appropriate for all type 2 diabetic patients? The Fremantle Diabetes Study

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is associated with better glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used cross-sectional and longitudinal data from type 2 diabetic participants in the observational, community-based Fremantle Diabetes Study (FDS) who reported SMBG status at study entry (n = 1,286) and annual reviews over 5 years (n = 531).

RESULTS

At study entry, 70% of patients performed SMBG, with a median of four tests per week (interquartile range two to seven). Patients with shorter diabetes duration; who were attending diabetes education, diabetes-related clinics, or medical specialists; who were taking insulin with or without oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs); and who were self-reporting hypoglycemic events were more likely to use SMBG. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal FDS data showed that HbA(1c) (A1C) was not significantly different between SMBG users and nonusers, either overall or within diabetes treatment groups (diet, OHAs, and insulin with or without OHAs). There was also no independent cross-sectional relationship between A1C and SMBG frequency. The average annual societal cost of using SMBG (in year 2000 Australian dollars [Adollars], excluding glucometers) was 162 Australian dollars per type 2 diabetic patient or 51 million Australian dollars when projected to the Australian diagnosed type 2 diabetic population.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither SMBG testing nor its frequency was associated with glycemic benefit in type 2 diabetic patients regardless of treatment. Our data did not include methods of SMBG delivery and application, factors that require further assessment in the evaluation of SMBG utility in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. SMBG may be still of value in the identification and prevention of hypoglycemia and in dose adjustment in insulin-treated patients.

Role of self-monitoring of blood glucose in glycemic control

OBJECTIVE

To examine the role of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in the management of diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Current trends and published evidence are reviewed.

RESULTS

Despite the widespread evidence that lowering glycemic levels reduces the risks of complications in patients with diabetes, little improvement in glycemic control has been noted among patients in the United States and Europe in recent years. Although SMBG has been widely used, considerable controversy surrounds its role in achieving glycemic control. The high cost of test strips has made considerations regarding appropriate recommendations for SMBG a priority, especially in light of the current climate of health-care cost-containment. Existing clinical recommendations lack specific guidance to patients and clinicians regarding SMBG practice intensity and frequency, particularly for those patients not treated with insulin. Previous studies of the association between SMBG and glycemic control often found weak and conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

A reexamination of the role of SMBG is needed, with special attention to the unique needs of patients using different diabetes treatments, within special clinical subpopulations, and during initiation of SMBG versus its ongoing use. Further understanding of the intensity and frequency of SMBG needed to reflect the variability in glycemic patterns would facilitate more specific guideline development. Educational programs that focus on teaching patients the recommended SMBG practice, specific glycemic targets, and appropriate responses to various blood glucose readings would be beneficial. Continuing medical education programs for health-care providers should suggest ways to analyze patient SMBG records to tailor medication regimens. For transfer or communication of SMBG reports to the clinical staff, a standardized format that extracts key data elements and allows quick review by health-care providers would be useful. Because the practice of SMBG is expensive, the cost-effectiveness of SMBG needs to be carefully assessed.

Self-monitoring of glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a Bayesian meta-analysis of direct and indirect comparisons

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relative effectiveness of interventions with self-monitoring blood glucose and self-monitoring of urine glucose, versus interventions without self-monitoring, in terms of HbA(1c) reductions in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Thirteen published full reports on randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of self-monitoring glucose were identified by a systematic search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library (1966-Nov 2005) and previous reviews. Three types of studies were included: self-monitoring of blood glucose versus no self-monitoring, self-monitoring of blood glucose versus self-monitoring of urine glucose and self-monitoring of blood glucose with regular feedback versus monitoring without feedback. The internal validity of studies was assessed systematically by two reviewers, using 13 criteria of a validated list. Results from the three types of studies were analysed simultaneously with a Bayesian metaanalysis of direct and indirect comparisons.

RESULTS

Adjusted for baseline HbA(1c) level and internal validity, interventions with self-monitoring of blood glucose showed a reduction in HbA(1c) of 0.40 percentage-points (%) (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.07 to 0.70%) in comparison to interventions without self-monitoring. Regular feedback more than doubled the HbA(1c) reduction. Self-monitoring of urine glucose showed comparable results to interventions without self-monitoring (0.02% decrease in HbA(1c); 95% CrI -0.62 to 0.70%). There is a 88% probability that interventions with self-monitoring blood glucose are more effective than interventions with urine glucose monitoring (relative reduction in HbA(1c) is 0.38%, 95% CrI -0.30 to 1.00%).

CONCLUSION

The randomized clinical trials performed to date provided positive results on the effectiveness of interventions with self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Regular medical feedback of the monitored HbA(1c) levels is important. Furthermore, self-monitoring of blood glucose is likely to be more effective than self-monitoring of urine glucose.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes and long-term outcome: an epidemiological cohort study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to obtain epidemiological data on self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in type 2 diabetes and to investigate the relationship of SMBG with disease-related morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

The German multicentre Retrolective Study 'Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose and Outcome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes' (ROSSO) followed 3,268 patients from diagnosis of type 2 diabetes between 1995 and 1999 until the end of 2003. Endpoints were diabetes-related morbidity (non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, foot amputation, blindness or haemodialysis) and all-cause mortality. SMBG was defined as self-measurement of blood glucose for at least 1 year.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up period of 6.5 years, 1,479 patients (45.3%) began SMBG prior to an endpoint and an additional 64 patients started SMBG after a non-fatal endpoint. Interestingly, many patients used SMBG while being treated with diet or oral hypoglycaemic drugs (808 of 2,515, 32%). At baseline, the SMBG cohort had higher mean fasting blood glucose levels than the non-SMBG cohort (p<0.001), suggesting that insufficient metabolic control was one reason for initiating SMBG. This was associated with a higher rate of microvascular endpoints. However, the total rate of non-fatal events, micro- and macrovascular, was lower in the SMBG group than in the non-SMBG group (7.2 vs 10.4%, p=0.002). A similar difference was found for the rate of fatal events (2.7 vs 4.6%, p=0.004). Cox regression analysis identified SMBG as an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality, with adjusted hazard ratios of 0.68 (95% CI 0.51-0.91, p=0.009) and 0.49 (95% CI 0.31-0.78, p=0.003), respectively. A better outcome for both endpoints was also observed in the SMBG cohort when only those patients who were not receiving insulin were analysed.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

SMBG was associated with decreased diabetes-related morbidity and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes, and this association remained in a subgroup of patients who were not receiving insulin therapy. SMBG may be associated with a healthier lifestyle and/or better disease management.

Current evidence regarding the value of self-monitored blood glucose testing

Many people with diabetes are falling short of attaining or maintaining glycemic goals. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is among the many strategies proposed to address the problem. SMBG complements hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing by providing specific information regarding the effects of diet, exercise, and medications on glycemia. Although the importance of self-monitoring is appreciated for insulin-using patients, evidence is still emerging in support of self-monitoring for patients with type 2 diabetes managed with oral agents or diet. Evaluating the available evidence requires a good understanding of the study design and methodology. Although several clinical trials involving SMBG have been insufficiently powered to detect clinically meaningful differences in HbA1c, recent meta-analyses have reproducibly supported the benefit of self-monitoring in non-insulin-treated patients. Although additional work is needed to establish optimal frequency and timing of SMBG, these studies can serve as a basis for conservative recommendations to guide patients and their healthcare providers.

Long-term non-pharmacologic weight loss interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Most persons with type 2 diabetes are overweight and obesity worsens the metabolic and physiologic abnormalities associated with diabetes.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of lifestyle and behavioral weight loss and weight control interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were obtained from computerized searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases, supplemented with hand searches of selected journals and consultation with experts in obesity research. The last search was conducted May, 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were published or unpublished randomized controlled trials in any language, and examined weight loss or weight control strategies using one or more dietary, physical activity, or behavioral interventions, with a follow-up interval of at least 12 months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Effects were combined using a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

The 22 studies of weight loss interventions identified had a 4,659 participants and follow-up of 1 to 5 years. The pooled weight loss for any intervention in comparison to usual care among 585 subjects was 1.7 kg (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.3 to 3.2), or 3.1% of baseline body weight among 517 subjects. Other main comparisons demonstrated nonsignificant results: among 126 persons receiving a physical activity and behavioral intervention, those who also received a very low calorie diet lost 3.0 kg (95% CI -0.5 to 6.4), or 1.6% of baseline body weight, more than persons receiving a low-calorie diet. Among 53 persons receiving identical dietary and behavioral interventions, those receiving more intense physical activity interventions lost 3.9 kg (95% CI -1.9 to 9.7), or 3.6% of baseline body weight, more than those receiving a less intense or no physical activity intervention. Comparison groups often achieved significant weight loss (up to 10.0 kg), minimizing between-group differences. Changes in glycated hemoglobin generally corresponded to changes in weight and were not significant when between-group differences were examined. No data were identified on quality of life and mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Weight loss strategies using dietary, physical activity, or behavioral interventions produced small between-group improvements in weight. These results were minimized by weight loss in the comparison group, however, and examination of individual study arms revealed that multicomponent interventions including very low calorie diets or low calorie diets may hold promise for achieving weight loss in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not using insulin

BACKGROUND

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) has been found to be effective for patients with type 1 diabetes and for patients with type 2 diabetes using insulin. There is much debate on the effectiveness of SMBG as a tool in the self-management for patients with type 2 diabetes who are not using insulin.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of SMBG in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not using insulin.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were obtained from searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases supplemented with hand searches of references of retrieved articles. Date of last search: September 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trails investigating the effects of SMBG compared with usual care and/or with self-monitoring of urine glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes who where not using insulin. Included studies should have used at least one of the following outcome measures: glycaemic control, quality of life, well-being, patient satisfaction, or hypoglycaemic episodes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data from included studies and assessed study quality. Data from the studies were compared to decide whether they were sufficiently homogeneous to pool in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Six randomised controlled trials were included in the review. Four trials compared SMBG with usual care, one trial compared SMBG with self-monitoring of urine glucose and there was one three-armed trial comparing SMBG with self-monitoring of urine glucose and usual care. Because of the differences in patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes between the studies, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis. The methodological quality of studies was low. Two of the six studies reported a significant lowering effect of self-monitoring of blood glucose on HbA1c. However, one of these studies had a co-intervention with education on diet and lifestyle. There were few data on the effects of other outcomes and these effects were not statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From this review we concluded that self-monitoring of blood glucose might be effective in improving glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes who are not using insulin. To assess the potential beneficial effects of SMBG in these patients a large and well-designed randomised controlled trial is required. This long-term trial should also investigate patient-related outcomes like quality of life, well-being and patient satisfaction, and provide adequate education to the patient to allow SMBG to be effective.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose as part of a multi-component therapy among non-insulin requiring type 2 diabetes patients: a meta-analysis (1966-2004)

OBJECTIVE

To determine if therapeutic management programs that include self-monitoring of blood glucose result in greater HbA1c reduction in non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes patients compared to programs without blood glucose self-monitoring.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Electronic databases including MEDLINE (1966-2004), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE (1950-2004), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) and the Online Index Journals of the American Diabetes Association (ADA 1978-2004) were searched. Personal collections of investigators were also explored. Randomized controlled trials comparing HbA1c reduction in therapies with and without blood glucose self-monitoring among adult, non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients were selected. Studies on patients who are pregnant, taking insulin, troglitazone or experimental drugs were excluded. Out of 14 potentially useful randomized controlled trials on self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes patients, eight studies with a total of 1307 subjects were included in the analysis. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of studies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The effect of SMBG was assessed by means of meta-analysis of the difference in HbA1c reduction between self-monitoring and non-self-monitoring groups.

RESULTS

Antidiabetic therapies that included blood glucose self-monitoring as part of a multi-component management strategy produced a mean additional HbA(1c) reduction of -0.39% (95%CI: -0.54%, -0.23%) under the fixed effects model and -0.42% (95%CI: -0.63%, -0.21%) under the random effects model, when compared to therapies that did not. Heterogeneity among studies was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Multi-component diabetes management programs with self-monitoring of blood glucose result in better glycemic control among non-insulin-using type 2 diabetes patients.

Long-term effectiveness of lifestyle and behavioral weight loss interventions in adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Most persons with type 2 diabetes are overweight, and obesity worsens the metabolic and physiologic abnormalities associated with diabetes. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of lifestyle and behavioral weight loss and weight control interventions in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Studies were obtained from searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases, supplemented with hand searches of selected journals and consultation with experts in obesity research. Studies were included if they were published or unpublished randomized controlled trials in any language that examined weight loss or weight control strategies using one or more dietary, physical activity, or behavioral interventions, with a follow-up interval of at least 12 months. Effects were combined using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The 22 studies of weight loss interventions identified yielded a total of 4659 participants with a follow-up of 1 to 5 years. The pooled weight loss for any intervention in comparison with usual care among 585 subjects was 1.7 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.3 to 3.2 kg), or 3.1% of baseline body weight among 511 subjects. Among 126 persons who underwent a physical activity and behavioral intervention, those who also received a very low-calorie diet lost 3.0 kg (95% CI: -0.5 to 6.4 kg), or 1.6% of baseline body weight, more than persons who received a low-calorie diet. Among 53 persons who received identical dietary and behavioral interventions, those who received a more intense physical activity intervention lost 3.9 kg (95% CI: -1.9 to 9.7 kg), or 3.6% of baseline body weight, more than those who received a less intense or no physical activity intervention. Comparison groups often achieved substantial weight loss (up to 10.0 kg), minimizing between-group differences. Changes in glycated hemoglobin level generally corresponded to changes in weight and were not substantial when between-group differences were examined.

CONCLUSION

Weight loss strategies involving dietary, physical activity, or behavioral interventions were associated with small between-group improvements in weight. These results were minimized by weight loss in the comparison group, however, and examination of individual study arms revealed that multicomponent interventions, including very low-calorie diets or low-calorie diets, may hold promise for achieving weight loss in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Is weight loss a realistic goal of treatment in type 2 diabetes? The implications of restraint theory

Obesity is a two-fold problem affecting both physical health and psychological well-being and one of the biggest obstacles to the management of type 2 diabetes because the most effective treatments frequently lead to weight gain. Recent studies have shown that addressing the problem of obesity first can lead to an improvement in blood glucose control, accompanied by favourable changes in physiological profiles. With the exception of surgical treatments, all obesity treatment programmes involve recommending dieting in one form or another, in order that individuals lose weight. However, all reviews document the failure of all obesity treatment approaches, behavioural, dietetic or pharmacological, to achieve significant and long-lasting weight loss. Research further suggests that dietary restraint may have many negative consequences and weight fluctuation may also have profound effects on psychological and physical health. The present paper highlights the need to reappraise the management of obesity in type 2 diabetes in light of these research findings and suggests an approach to treatment, which would help patients to limit the associated physical and psychological costs and importantly ensure that the treatment itself does not compound their difficulties.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in diabetic patients: from the least common denominator to the greatest common multiple

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is recognized as necessary in insulin-treated diabetic patients. There is less evidence for the regular use of SMBG in non-insulin-using type 2 diabetic patients. The rationale for an appropriate regimen of SMBG might be to have at least one time-point of monitoring included within each of the 3 periods of daytime i.e. fasting, postprandial and postabsorptive periods. Interventional trials have indicated that a 4-to 5-point daily profile represents an optimal regimen for SMBG in type 1 diabetic patients with satisfactory diabetic control. This type of SMBG includes 4 daily glucose determinations (3 before each meal and one at bedtime) and one weekly monitoring at 3: 00 am. However additional determinations should be made within postprandial states, particularly when rapid insulin analogues or pump-treatments are used. In non-insulin-using type 2 diabetic patients, studies of diurnal glycemic profiles have indicated that postprandial glucose is an important contributor to HbA1c and that mid-morning hyperglycemia is the "weakest link" of metabolic control. Therefore mid-morning glucose testing should be recommended when HbA1c levels are not correctly controlled. Furthermore, extended postlunch determinations at 5: 00 pm can be helpful for checking both the quality and safety of diabetic control in such patients. The frequency and timing of SMBG depend both on the type (1 or 2) of diabetes and should be a compromise between optimal and minimal regimens.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose significantly improves metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the Auto-Surveillance Intervention Active (ASIA) study

OBJECTIVE

Self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in type 2 diabetes is a topic of current interest (imbalance between increased health-care costs and improvement in compliance with treatment and diet). An open label randomized prospective study was designed to compare changes in metabolic control over 6 months in patients managed with usual recommendations alone (conventional assessment group) or combined with SMBG.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients not treated with insulin or previously self monitored, 40 to 75 years of age, with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes > 1 year and standardized HbA(1c) level > =7.5 and< =11% were randomized to either a control group or SMBG group. They were followed up every 6 weeks over 24 weeks. Patients in the SMBG group were given the same device (Ascensia Esprit Discmeter, Bayer) and were required to perform at least 6 capillary assays a week (3 different days of the week, including weekend). Management of patients was standardized, including drugs, diet and physical activity. The primary efficacy criterion was change in HbA(1c) level in Intent To Treat (ITT) patients. Assays were performed at baseline, at 3 and 6 months using the calibrated DCA 2000(R) device (Bayer).

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty five general practitioners randomized 988 patients (ITT Population), but 689 patients were evaluable for the primary criterion. At the endpoint, HbA(1c) was lower in the SMBG group (8.1 +/- 1.6%) than in the conventional treatment group (8.4 +/- 1.4%, P=0.012). The change in HbA(1c) levels between baseline and endpoint was classified into two classes: improvement if a change > 0.5% occurred, stability or worsening in case of a change< =0.5%; 57.1% of patients in the SMBG group vs 46.8% in the control group had an improvement in HbA(1c) level (P=0.007) after 3 months. A steady state was reached during the last 3 months. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed and identified factors predictive of improvement in HbA(1c) levels: HbA(1c) at baseline: odd ratio (OR)=1.749 (P<0.001), SMBG group (reference value: SMBG group): OR=0.665 (P=0.015), duration of diabetes: OR=0.953 (P=0.001) and BMI: OR=0.962 (P=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first multicenter, controlled, prospective trial conducted on a large number of patients demonstrating that SMBG was statistically associated with a better quality of metabolic control than usual traditional recommendations alone in type 2 diabetes.

Global assessment for quality and safety of control in type 2 diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

HbA1c (glycated haemoglobin) suffers from obvious limitations in type 2 diabetic patients at risk of hypoglycaemia or requiring rapid therapeutic adjustments. This study was conducted to discern whether the monitoring of one particular plasma glucose (PG) value of the diurnal profile can be used in such situations.

DESIGN

Four diurnal PG concentrations (at 08:00, 11:00, 14:00 and 17:00 h) were measured in standardized conditions in 480 (246 men, 234 women) noninsulin-using type 2 diabetic patients. Sensitivities for predicting treatment success, i.e. HbA1c<7%, with a specificity > or =90% were calculated and compared using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

The probabilities (areas under ROC curves) for predicting HbA1c<7% were significantly higher at 11:00, 14:00 and 17:00 h than at 08:00 h. The optimal PG cut-off values for predicting treatment success were, respectively, 6, 9, 7 and 6 mmol L(-1) at 08:00 h, 11:00, 14:00 and 17:00 h. In most patients the lowest PG values of the diurnal profile were at 17:00 h, and 17.5% of the patients with HbA1c<7% (54.5% of them treated with sulphonylureas) exhibited a PG value less than 4.4 mmol L(-1) at 17:00 h (P=0.0034 vs. the other timepoints).

CONCLUSIONS

Glucose monitoring at 17:00 h, i.e. during the extended postlunch period, appears as a global marker of control in noninsulin-using type 2 diabetic patients both for detecting patients at risk of hypoglycaemia and for assessing the short-term quality of diabetic control.

A systematic review of psychosocial outcomes following education, self-management and psychological interventions in diabetes mellitus

Self-management and psychological interventions for diabetes have become increasingly common and have shown some positive impact on glycemic control. The association of such interventions with psychosocial outcomes is however, less clear. The current review examines the impact of these interventions on psychosocial outcomes including depression, anxiety, adjustment and quality of life. A systematic search of the literature was performed on Medline, Embase and Psychlit. Reference lists were screened for studies that met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Studies were coded on outcomes both over time and relative to control groups. In addition studies were classified as being principally educational, self-management or psychological in type, and the different components in the intervention were determined. Thirty-six studies were identified. Detrimental effects were not generally seen following any type of intervention. Depression seemed to be particularly improved following psychological interventions, whilst quality of life improved more following self-management interventions. A number of methodological issues, such as the specificity of measure used, characteristics of the population and type of intervention were however, influential in the impact of interventions on outcomes. It is recommended that future studies would benefit from being larger with controlled designs, using diabetes specific measures and providing clearer descriptions of intervention components. This will allow greater understanding of what contexts different interventions are most suited to, and which components are key to, improving psychological well-being and quality of life.

Intensified blood glucose monitoring improves glycemic control in stable, insulin-treated veterans with type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Outcomes in Veterans Study (DOVES)

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of intensified self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) testing on glycemic control.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Subjects with stable, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes performed SMBG using an electronic blood glucose meter before all meals and at bedtime for 8 weeks. Baseline data were collected on demographics, clinical characteristics, diet, and exercise. HbA(1c) was measured at baseline, at 4 weeks, and at 8 weeks. After the intensified monitoring period, subjects resumed their usual monitoring. HbA(1c) was then measured at 24, 37, and 52 weeks. Multivariate linear regression was used to determine the effect of monitoring on glycemic control.

RESULTS

A total of 201 subjects completed the monitoring period. The baseline HbA(1c) (8.10 +/- 1.67%) decreased during the monitoring period by 0.30 +/- 0.68% (P < 0.001) at 4 weeks and by 0.36 +/- 0.88% (P < 0.001) at 8 weeks. Although entry HbA(1c) and compliance independently predicted the week 8 HbA(1c) (r = 0.862, P < 0.001), standardized regression analysis found that compliance with the SMBG protocol influenced the week 8 HbA(1c) more than age, sex, BMI, exercise level, carbohydrate consumption, or treatment intensity at baseline. However, SMBG benefited only subjects whose testing compliance exceeded 75% or with an entry HbA(1c) >8.0%. Decreases in HbA(1c) (-0.31 +/- 1.17%, P = 0.001) persisted in the 159 subjects followed for 52 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensified blood glucose monitoring improved glycemic control in a large cohort of stable, insulin-treated veterans with type 2 diabetes. SMBG provided a strong stimulus for improved self-care resulting in clinically important and sustained reductions in HbA(1c).

Meta-analysis of randomized educational and behavioral interventions in type 2 diabetes

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effect of educational and behavioral interventions on body weight and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Studies selected for analysis were published randomized controlled trials that evaluated educational and behavioral interventions (no drug interventions) in type 2 diabetes (sample size > or = 10). These criteria were applied to searches of electronic databases and relevant bibliographies. Data were independently abstracted by 2 reviewers and adjudicated by consensus.

RESULTS

Of the 63 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 18 provided enough information for pooled estimates of glycohemoglobin (total Ghb, HbA1, or HbA1C). These 18 studies yielded 2720 participants (sample sizes of 18 to 749). Interventions ranged from 1 to 19 months; follow-up ranged from 1 to 26 months. Glycohemoglobin was reduced by a mean of 0.43%. When results were stratified by quality score, glycohemoglobin was -0.50% and -0.38% for studies with high and low quality scores, respectively. When weighting studies by sample size, fasting blood glucose was reduced by 24 mg/dL and weight by 3 lbs.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous educational and behavioral interventions in type 2 diabetes have produced modest improvements in glycemic control. Future research should refine such interventions and improve methodology.

Self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the effect on glycemic control

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of self-management education on GHb in adults with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched for English language trials in Medline (1980-1999), Cinahl (1982-1999), and the Educational Resources Information Center database (ERIC) (1980-1999), and we manually searched review articles, journals with highest topic relevance, and reference lists of included articles. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials that were published in the English language, tested the effect of self-management education on adults with type 2 diabetes, and reported extractable data on the effect of treatment on GHb. A total of 31 studies of 463 initially identified articles met selection criteria. We computed net change in GHb, stratified by follow-up interval, tested for trial heterogeneity, and calculated pooled effects sizes using random effects models. We examined the effect of baseline GHb, follow-up interval, and intervention characteristics on GHb.

RESULTS

On average, the intervention decreased GHb by 0.76% (95% CI 0.34-1.18) more than the control group at immediate follow-up; by 0.26% (0.21% increase - 0.73% decrease) at 1-3 months of follow-up; and by 0.26% (0.05-0.48) at > or = 4 months of follow-up. GHb decreased more with additional contact time between participant and educator; a decrease of 1% was noted for every additional 23.6 h (13.3-105.4) of contact.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-management education improves GHb levels at immediate follow-up, and increased contact time increases the effect. The benefit declines 1-3 months after the intervention ceases, however, suggesting that learned behaviors change over time. Further research is needed to develop interventions effective in maintaining long-term glycemic control.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes registry

PURPOSE

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of self-monitoring blood glucose levels to improve glycemic control.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A cohort design was used to assess the relation between self-monitoring frequency (1996 average daily glucometer strip utilization) and the first glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level measured in 1997. The study sample included 24,312 adult patients with diabetes who were members of a large, group model, managed care organization. We estimated the difference between HbA1c levels in patients who self-monitored at frequencies recommended by the American Diabetes Association compared with those who monitored less frequently or not at all. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race, education, occupation, income, duration of diabetes, medication refill adherence, clinic appointment "no show" rate, annual eye exam attendance, use of nonpharmacological (diet and exercise) diabetes therapy, smoking, alcohol consumption, hospitalization and emergency room visits, and the number of daily insulin injections.

RESULTS

Self-monitoring among patients with type 1 diabetes (> or = 3 times daily) and pharmacologically treated type 2 diabetes (at least daily) was associated with lower HbA1c levels (1.0 percentage points lower in type 1 diabetes and 0.6 points lower in type 2 diabetes) than was less frequent monitoring (P < 0.0001). Although there are no specific recommendations for patients with nonpharmacologically treated type 2 diabetes, those who practiced self-monitoring (at any frequency) had a 0.4 point lower HbA1c level than those not practicing at all (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

More frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose levels was associated with clinically and statistically better glycemic control regardless of diabetes type or therapy. These findings support the clinical recommendations suggested by the American Diabetes Association.

Effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Nursing and Allied Health databases were searched for English-language articles published between 1980 and 1999. Studies were original articles reporting the results of randomized controlled trials of the effectiveness of self-management training in people with type 2 diabetes. Relevant data on study design, population demographics, interventions, outcomes, methodological quality, and external validity were tabulated. Interventions were categorized based on educational focus (information, lifestyle behaviors, mechanical skills, and coping skills), and outcomes were classified as knowledge, attitudes, and self-care skills; lifestyle behaviors, psychological outcomes, and quality of life; glycemic control; cardiovascular disease risk factors; and economic measures and health service utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 72 studies described in 84 articles were identified for this review. Positive effects of self-management training on knowledge, frequency and accuracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose, self-reported dietary habits, and glycemic control were demonstrated in studies with short follow-up (<6 months). Effects of interventions on lipids, physical activity, weight, and blood pressure were variable. With longer follow-up, interventions that used regular reinforcement throughout follow-up were sometimes effective in improving glycemic control. Educational interventions that involved patient collaboration may be more effective than didactic interventions in improving glycemic control, weight, and lipid profiles. No studies demonstrated the effectiveness of self-management training on cardiovascular disease-related events or mortality; no economic analyses included indirect costs; few studies examined health-care utilization. Performance, selection, attrition, and detection bias were common in studies reviewed, and external generalizability was often limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes, particularly in the short term. Further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of self-management interventions on sustained glycemic control, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and ultimately, microvascular and cardiovascular disease and quality of life.

Self-monitoring in Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Self-monitoring of blood or urine glucose is widely used by subjects with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the technique at improving blood glucose control through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were identified that compared the effects of blood or urine glucose monitoring with no self-monitoring, or blood glucose self-monitoring with urine glucose self-monitoring, on glycated haemoglobin as primary outcome in Type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

Eight reports were identified. These were rated for quality and data were abstracted. The mean (SD) quality score was 15.0 (1.69) on a scale ranging from 0 to 28. No study had sufficient power to detect differences in glycated haemoglobin (GHb) of less than 0.5%. One study was excluded because it was a cluster randomized trial of a complex intervention and one because fructosamine was used as the outcome measure. A meta-analysis was performed using data from four studies that compared blood or urine monitoring with no regular monitoring. The estimated reduction in GHb from monitoring was -0.25% (95% confidence interval -0.61 to 0.10%). Three studies that compared blood glucose monitoring with urine glucose monitoring were also combined. The estimated reduction in GHb from monitoring blood glucose rather than urine glucose was -0.03% (-0.52 to 0.47%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results do not provide evidence for clinical effectiveness of an item of care with appreciable costs. Further work is needed to evaluate self-monitoring so that resources for diabetes care can be used more efficiently.

Frequency and impact of SMBG on glycemic control in patients with NIDDM in an urban teaching hospital clinic

Few published reports have documented the value of SMBG on glycemic control in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), and no reports have evaluated predominantly African American patients who are at high risk for NIDDM and associated complications. In this study a 13-item survey was given to 98 patients with NIDDM to assess the frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and its impact on glycemic control. Sixty-one patients performed SMBG and 37 did not. More SMBG testers were taking insulin compared with the nontesters. GHb was comparable between groups. Among the testers there was no difference in mean GHb values based on the frequency of SMBG. Most testers performed SMBG before meals (93%) and recorded their values (85%); many had difficulty obtaining a good blood sample (30%). The most common reason for not testing was cost of supplies (77%). Performance of SMBG in these NIDDM patients was not associated with better glycemic control. Cost was a prohibitive factor for the nontesters.

Epidemiology and determinants of blood glucose self-monitoring in clinical practice

The aim of this study was to describe the epidemiology of self-monitoring of blood glucose and to identify specific characteristics of those subgroups of diabetic patients treated with insulin that are most likely to monitor their blood glucose according to medical recommendations. Data were collected on 1384 insulin-treated patients, enrolled from 35 diabetic outpatient clinics and 49 general practitioners' offices between December 1993 and June 1994. Seventeen Italian regions out of 20 were included in the study. Our data show that 418 (31%) diabetic patients treated with insulin had never practised blood glucose self-monitoring. In addition, only 242 patients (18.2%) self-monitored their glycemia with a mean frequency of at least once a day (29.7% among insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and 13.9%, among insulin-treated non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM-IT) patients). Patients' characteristics associated with a higher probability of practising blood glucose self-monitoring were age below 50 years, being treated at a diabetic outpatient clinic, hypertension, need of three or more insulin injections per day, history of hypoglycemic episodes, ability to self-manage insulin doses. Our study calls for vigorous efforts aimed at promoting the incorporation of clearly-defined educational programs at each level of care, in order to improve the motivation and self-care of diabetic patients. Furthermore, studies are necessary to identify subgroups of diabetic patients that truly need to self-monitor blood glycemia, and to assess the efficacy of the practice of self-monitoring of blood glucose in improving metabolic control and reducing acute and long-term diabetic complications.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in overweight type 2 diabetic patients

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SBGM) is widely recommended for both type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients despite the lack of evidence of benefit in glucose control or as an aid in weight loss in type 2 subjects. This study tested the hypothesis that combined use of SMBG and dietary carbohydrate (CHO) counting, using the blood monitoring results to shape dietary CHO quotas, is beneficial in managing type 2 diabetes. Twenty-three overweight (body mass index, BMI 27.5-44 kg/m2) patients aged 40-75 participated in a 28-week behavioral weight control program. Baseline hemoglobin HbA1c ranged between 9.5% and 13.5% (normal range 5.5%-7.7%). Subjects were matched for weight, sex, and HbA1c and assigned to small (4-8 participants) groups which met weekly for 12 weeks and then monthly for 16 weeks. After 8 weeks, the groups were randomized either to continue the behavioral program or to have SMBG and dietary CHO counting. Glucose monitoring was performed 6 times daily (pre- and 2 h postprandially) for the first month, focusing on the meal increment and correlating this to dietary CHO intake. Weight loss was identical in both groups during the year of follow-up. The HbA1c level showed a progressive decline in experimental subjects (P < 0.05), whereas there was no improvement in control subjects.

Home glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes: is it a waste of time?

A cross-sectional study to assess home glucose monitoring practices was conducted in 200 non-insulin-treated diabetic patients consecutively attending our hospital clinic. Of the 200, 97 (48%) patients (Group 1) regularly monitored urine (n = 74), blood (n = 19) or both (n = 4); 103 (52%) patients (Group 2) performed no home monitoring. The two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, duration of diabetes and type of treatment. The prevalence of diabetic complications was also closely comparable and only peripheral neuropathy differed between the groups, being more common in Group 1 (n = 12) than Group 2 (n = 4); p < 0.05. There was also no significant difference between the HbA1 concentration (mean +/- SD) in Group 1 (9.7 +/- 2.2%) and Group 2 (9.4 +/- 2.0%). The mean frequency of home monitoring was four tests weekly, but only 21 (22%) kept a written record and 60 (62%) would never alter their treatment on the basis of their results. Almost a third of patients could not interpret the results of monitoring or give the normal range of values. Home glucose monitoring, particularly of urine, is widely practised in Type 2 diabetes, at considerable overall expense. However, convincing evidence of its value in helping patients improve their blood glucose control or preventing the complications of the disease is lacking.

Home blood glucose monitoring: effectiveness in a general population of patients who have non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether home blood glucose monitoring as used by non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus patients followed in primary care nonresearch clinics improves glycemic control or reduces utilization of the outpatient laboratory.

DESIGN

A retrospective chart review for 229 patients receiving outpatient supplies for home testing of either blood or urine.

SETTING

A variety of nonresearch clinics at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center, a teaching hospital affiliated with an academic university medical center.

PATIENTS

Outpatient veterans followed in diabetes, primary care, internal medicine, or endocrine clinics.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The mean glycosylated hemoglobin for an unselected group monitoring glycemic control by urine testing only was 11.32% and for those using blood monitoring was 11.37%. Frequency and duration of monitoring had no apparent impact on glucose control. There was no decrease in the utilization of the laboratory among those patients practicing home blood glucose monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

For non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients followed in a nonresearch clinic setting, the benefits of home blood glucose monitoring remain to be proven.