Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Before and After Medicare Expansion Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Diabetes Who Do Not Use Insulin

Division of Diabetes Translation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga., USA.
American Journal of Public Health (Impact Factor: 4.55). 03/2008; 98(2):358-64. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.112185
Source: PubMed


The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 authorized Medicare to expand the coverage of glucose monitors and strips to non-insulin users with diabetes and self-management training to non-hospital-based programs. We examined the impact of this expansion on self-monitoring of blood glucose among Medicare beneficiaries who were not using insulin to treat their diabetes.
With data from the 1996-2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and a logistic regression model using a complex survey design, we compared the probability of self-monitoring of blood glucose among Medicare beneficiaries at the frequency recommended by the American Academy of Family Physicians' clinical guidelines before and after the Medicare expansion. We also compared the change in the frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose during these periods between Medicare beneficiaries and persons with private insurance by using a difference-in-difference model.
Medicare expansion was positively associated with the probability of self-monitoring of blood glucose for both Medicare beneficiaries and persons with private insurance; the magnitude was between 7.1 and 16.6 percentage points.
The Medicare expansion effectively increased the frequency of the recommended self-monitoring of blood glucose in the Medicare population.

Download full-text


Available from: Ping Zhang
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Current clinical guidelines for diabetes care encourage self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to improve glycemic control. Specific protocols remain variable, however, particularly among non-insulin-using patients. This is due in part to efficacy studies that neglect to consider (1) the performance of monitoring equipment under real-world conditions, (2) whether or how patients have been taught to take action on test results, and (3) the physiological, behavioral, and social circumstances in which SMBG is carried out. As such, a multidisciplinary group of specialists, including several endocrinologists, a health psychologist, a diabetes nurse practitioner, and a patient advocate (the Panel), discuss within this review article how the potential of SMBG might be fully realized in today's healthcare environment. The resulting recommendations cover technological, clinical, behavioral, and research considerations with the aim of achieving short- and long-term benefits, ranging from fewer hypoglycemic episodes to lower complication-related costs. The panel also made suggestions for designing future studies that increase the ability to discern optimal models of SMBG utilization for individuals with diabetes who may, or may not, use insulin.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2008 · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 46 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have passed laws and regulations mandating that health insurance plans cover diabetes treatment and preventive care. Previous research on state mandates suggested that these policies had little impact, since many health plans already covered the benefits. Here, we analyze the contents of and model the effect of state mandates. We examined how state mandates impacted the likelihood of using three types of diabetes preventive care: annual eye exams, annual foot exams, and performing daily self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). We collected information on diabetes benefits specified in state mandates and time the mandates were enacted. To assess impact, we used data that the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System gathered between 1996 and 2000. 4,797 individuals with self-reported diabetes and covered by private insurance were included; 3,195 of these resided in the 16 states that passed state mandates between 1997 and 1999; 1,602 resided in the 8 states or the District of Columbia without state mandates by 2000. Multivariate logistic regression models (with state fixed effect, controlling for patient demographic characteristics and socio-economic status, state characteristics, and time trend) were used to model the association between passing state mandates and the usage of the forms of diabetes preventive care, both individually and collectively. All 16 states that passed mandates between 1997 and 1999 required coverage of diabetic monitors and strips, while 15 states required coverage of diabetes self management education. Only 1 state required coverage of periodic eye and foot exams. State mandates were positively associated with a 6.3 (P = 0.04) and a 5.8 (P = 0.03) percentage point increase in the probability of privately insured diabetic patient's performing SMBG and simultaneous receiving all three preventive care, respectively; state mandates were not significantly associated with receiving annual diabetic eye (0.05 percentage points decrease, P = 0.92) or foot exams (2.3 percentage points increase, P = 0.45). Effects of state mandates varied by preventive care type, with state mandates being associated with a small increase in SMBG. We found no evidence that state mandates were effective in increasing receipt of annual eye or foot exams. The small or non-significant effects might be attributed to small numbers of insured people not having the benefits prior to the mandates' passage. If state mandates' purpose is to provide improved benefits to many persons, policy makers should consider determining the number of people who might benefit prior to passing the mandate.
    Full-text · Article · May 2010 · BMC Health Services Research
  • Source

    Full-text · Article · Apr 2013 · Revista Española de Salud Pública
Show more