Literature DB >> 11823730

Self-monitoring of glucose levels for people with type 2 diabetes.

Valerie Holmes1, Peter Griffiths.   

Abstract

To determine the most effective way of monitoring glucose levels as an indicator of glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes in the community, we conducted a criteria-based review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials that studied the efficacy of various glucose monitoring strategies. We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, CINAHL and BNIPlus databases for relevant studies. The journals 'Diabetes', 'Diabetic Medicine', 'Diabetologica', 'Evidence-Based Medicine' and 'Evidence-Based Nursing' were hand searched. The outcome of interest was glycaemic control, as measured by glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)). A total of 642 titles were identified from the search; three studies answered the question criteria and only one study met all the quality criteria. The study that met the criteria was a systematic review of four trials measuring the efficacy of self-monitoring of glucose levels. The reduction in HbA(1c) in those who monitored glucose levels was estimated to be -0.25% (95% Cl -0.61 - +0.10). This result shows a small improvement, but it is not statistically significant. A meta-analysis was also performed on three studies (n=278) comparing HbA(1c) in subjects who performed blood glucose monitoring with those who performed urine monitoring. The reduction in HbA(1c) when monitoring blood glucose rather than urine glucose was -0.03% (95% Cl -0.52 - +0.47). This result is not statistically significant. The efficacy of blood and urine glucose monitoring testing, for people with type 2 diabetes, in improving glycaemic control as measured by HbA(1c) levels is still questionable. A rigorous randomized controlled trial is needed to establish these answers although there is no evidence of harm. Clinical protocols that make recommendations for glucose monitoring strategies for people with type 2 diabetes should acknowledge that the evidence is weak. There is no basis to recommend one method above another.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11823730     DOI: 10.12968/bjcn.2002.7.1.9436

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Community Nurs        ISSN: 1462-4753


  4 in total

1.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose: a pilot review: impact of computer software modifications on compliance.

Authors:  Anita D Patel; Viktoria Kharlamb; Arthur P Reiter; Ron Lovly
Journal:  P T       Date:  2008-03

2.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Anders Tengblad; Ewa Grodzinsky; Kjell Lindström; Sigvard Mölstad; Lars Borgquist; Carl Johan Ostgren
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.581

3.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: an overview.

Authors:  Nanne Kleefstra; Johanna Hortensius; Kornelis Jj van Hateren; Susan Jj Logtenberg; Sebastiaan T Houweling; Rijk Ob Gans; Henk Jg Bilo
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes       Date:  2009-09-09       Impact factor: 3.168

4.  The relationship between type of drug therapy and blood glucose self-monitoring test strips claimed by beneficiaries of the Seniors' Pharmacare Program in Nova Scotia, Canada.

Authors:  Chiranjeev Sanyal; Stephen D Graham; Charmaine Cooke; Ingrid Sketris; Dawn M Frail; Gordon Flowerdew
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-05-24       Impact factor: 2.655

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.