Article

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

Department of Public Health Sciences, Guy's, King's and St. Thomas' School of Medicine, King's College London, UK.
Diabetic Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.12). 12/2000; 17(11):755-61. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2000.00390.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

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.
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.
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%).
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.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Paul T Seed
  • Source
    • "We also anticipated that the effects of progress monitoring might vary for different goals. For example, self-monitoring of blood glucose levels could be an effective way to manage diabetes (Allemann, Houriet, Diem, & Stettler, 2009;Coster, Gulliford, Seed, Powrie, & Swaminathan, 2000), while self-weighing may have a smaller impact on weight loss (Burke, Wang, & Sevick, 2011;VanWormer, French, Pereira, & Welsh, 2008). The methodological rigor of the primary studies might also influence the validity of estimated effect sizes (Juni, Altman, & Matthias, 2001;Moher et al., 1999;Moja et al., 2005;Oxman & Guyatt, 1988). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Control theory and other frameworks for understanding self-regulation suggest that monitoring goal progress is a crucial process that intervenes between setting and attaining a goal, and helps to ensure that goals are translated into action. However, the impact of progress monitoring interventions on rates of behavioral performance and goal attainment has yet to be quantified. A systematic literature search identified 138 studies (N �= 19,951) that randomly allocated participants to an intervention designed to promote monitoring of goal progress versus a control condition. All studies reported the effects of the treatment on (a) the frequency of progress monitoring and (b) subsequent goal attainment. A random effects model revealed that, on average, interventions were successful at increasing the frequency of monitoring goal progress (d� �= 1.98, 95% CI [1.71, 2.24]) and promoted goal attainment (d� �= 0.40, 95% CI [0.32, 0.48]). Furthermore, changes in the frequency of progress monitoring mediated the effect of the interventions on goal attainment. Moderation tests revealed that progress monitoring had larger effects on goal attainment when the outcomes were reported or made public, and when the information was physically recorded. Taken together, the findings suggest that monitoring goal progress is an effective self-regulation strategy, and that interventions that increase the frequency of progress monitoring are likely to promote behavior change.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · Psychological Bulletin
  • Source
    • "Patients with Type 1 diabetes routinely self-monitor and there have been several attempts to utilise communication technologies to support a younger and more mobile patient population [50] [51]. However, the evidence base to support regular self-monitoring of blood glucose for patients with Type 2 diabetes is weak [52] [53] [54]. Small improvements in glucose control have been found in some studies but the clinical impacts of these changes over the long term are not known. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To propose a research agenda that addresses technological and other knowledge gaps in developing telemonitoring solutions for patients with chronic diseases, with particular focus on detecting deterioration early enough to intervene effectively. A mixed methods approach incorporating literature review, key informant, and focus group interviews to gain an in-depth, multidisciplinary understanding of current approaches, and a roadmapping process to synthesise a research agenda. Counter to intuition, the research agenda for early detection of deterioration in patients with chronic diseases is not only primarily about advances in sensor technology but also much more about the problems of clinical specification, translation, and interfacing. The ultimate aim of telemonitoring is not fully agreed between the actors (patients, clinicians, technologists, and service providers). This leads to unresolved issues such as: (1) How are sensors used by patients as part of daily routines? (2) What are the indicators of early deterioration and how might they be used to trigger alerts? (3) How should alerts lead to appropriate levels of responses across different agencies and sectors? Attempts to use telemonitoring to improve the care of patients with chronic diseases over the last two decades have so far failed to lead to systems that are embedded in routine clinical practice. Attempts at implementation have paid insufficient attention to understanding patient and clinical needs and the complex dynamics and accountabilities that arise at the level of service models. A suggested way ahead is to co-design technology and services collaboratively with all stakeholders.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2011 · International Journal of Medical Informatics
    • "Evidence for the efficacy of SMBG in type 2 diabetic patients is, however, still conflicting (Coster et al., 2000; Franciosi et al., 2005), although some studies suggest improvement of metabolic control in type 2 diabetes using SMBG. The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study showed that improved BG control decreases the frequency of new-onset microvascular complications and delays the progression of established microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33, 1998). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Blood glucose measurements are generally accepted components of a modern diabetes self-management. The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is, however, discussed controversially and only a few studies addressed the efficacy of SMBG under real-life conditions so far. In order to investigate whether the frequency of SMBG is related to long-term metabolic control, data from the DPV-Wiss-database, a standardized,prospective, computer-based documentation of diabetes care and outcome, were analyzed for patients with type 1(n = 19,491) and type 2 (n = 5,009) diabetes from 191 centers in Germany and Austria. Local HbA1c reference ranges were mathematically adjusted to the DCCT reference. For each patient, data from the most recent year of diabetes care were used. On average,patients with type 1 diabetes performed 4.4 blood glucose measurements/day. Corrected for age, gender, diabetes duration,on intensified (>or=4 daily injections or CSII) therapy (HbA1c reduction of 0.32% for one additional SMBG/day) compared to patients on conventional (1-3 daily injections) therapy(HbA1c-reduction of 0.16% for one additional SMBG/day). In 2,021 patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (2.7 measurements/day), more frequent SMBG was associated with better metabolic control (HbA1c-reduction of 0.16% for one additionalSMBG/day, p < 0.0001), while in 2,988 patients on OAD or diet alone (2.0 measurements/day), more frequent blood glucose measurements were associated with higher HbA1c-levels(HbA1c-increase of 0.14% for one additional SMBG/day,p < 0.0001). These data indicate that more frequent SMBG are associated with better metabolic control in both, patients with type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Since no benefit ofSMBG on metabolic control was found in patients with type 2 diabetes on OAD or diet alone, SMBG should primarily be recommended for those patients with suboptimal metabolic control whereas the benefit of SHBG in non-insulin-treated patients with adequate HbA1c-levels remains uncertain.insulin therapy and center difference, the SMBG frequency was associated with better metabolic control (HbA1c-reduction of0.26% for one additional SMBG/day, p < 0.0001). HbA1c-reduction with higher frequency of SMBG was more pronounced in patients Blood glucose measurements are generally accepted components of a modern diabetes self-management. The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is, however, discussed controversially and only a few studies addressed the efficacy of SMBG under real-life conditions so far. In order to investigate whether the frequency of SMBG is related to long-term metabolic control, data from the DPV-Wiss-database, a standardized,prospective, computer-based documentation of diabetes care and outcome, were analyzed for patients with type 1(n = 19,491) and type 2 (n = 5,009) diabetes from 191 centers in Germany and Austria. Local HbA1c reference ranges were mathematically adjusted to the DCCT reference. For each patient, data from the most recent year of diabetes care were used. On average,patients with type 1 diabetes performed 4.4 blood glucose measurements/day. Corrected for age, gender, diabetes duration,insulin therapy and center difference, the SMBG frequency wasassociated with better metabolic control (HbA1c-reduction of 0.26% for one additional SMBG/day, p < 0.0001). HbA1c-reduction with higher frequency of SMBG was more pronounced in patients on intensified (>or= 4 daily injections or CSII) therapy (HbA1c reduction of 0.32% for one additional SMBG/day) compared to patients on conventional (1-3 daily injections) therapy(HbA1c-reduction of 0.16% for one additional SMBG/day). In 2,021 patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (2.7 measurements/day), more frequent SMBG was associated with better metabolic control (HbA1c-reduction of 0.16% for one additionalSMBG/day, p < 0.0001), while in 2,988 patients on OAD or diet alone (2.0 measurements/day), more frequent blood glucose measurements were associated with higher HbA1c-levels(HbA1c-increase of 0.14% for one additional SMBG/day, p < 0.0001). These data indicate that more frequent SMBG are associated with better metabolic control in both, patients with type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Since no benefit of SMBG on metabolic control was found in patients with type 2 diabetes on OAD or diet alone, SMBG should primarily be recommended for those patients with suboptimal metabolic control whereas the benefit of SHBG in non-insulin-treated patients with adequate HbA1c-levels remains uncertain.
    No preview · Article · Jul 2006 · Experimental and Clinical Endocrinology & Diabetes
Show more