OBJECTIVE: Prospective evaluation of the use of blood glucose test results for treatment actions by families of youth with IDDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients with IDDM used reflectance meters with memory for SMBG for 28 days. Parents kept weekly diaries of six types of uses of SMBG data. We collected SMBG data from the reflectance meters, HbA1 and serum fructosamine assays, and measures of behavioral factors that could affect use of SMBG data. RESULTS: Families recorded a mean of 4.85 data-based actions during the 28-day study, and 74% of the families reported at least one such action. Fifty percent of recorded actions consisted of management of hypoglycemia and, among the remainder, only 18% were anticipatory, proactive actions. Partial correlation analysis showed that families with more frequent use of SMBG data had less parent-child conflict about diabetes, more diabetes knowledge, and better overall treatment adherence. Use of SMBG data was unrelated to objective indices of the need for treatment adjustments or to diabetic control. CONCLUSIONS: Most families made active use of their SMBG data, but few of these actions were proactive. Behavioral factors were stronger predictors of family use of SMBG data than were objective indices of the need for treatment adjustments. The results illustrate the need for further research on use of SMBG data and methods to enhance its impact on diabetic control.
OBJECTIVE: Prospective evaluation of the use of blood glucose test results for treatment actions by families of youth with IDDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients with IDDM used reflectance meters with memory for SMBG for 28 days. Parents kept weekly diaries of six types of uses of SMBG data. We collected SMBG data from the reflectance meters, HbA1 and serum fructosamine assays, and measures of behavioral factors that could affect use of SMBG data. RESULTS: Families recorded a mean of 4.85 data-based actions during the 28-day study, and 74% of the families reported at least one such action. Fifty percent of recorded actions consisted of management of hypoglycemia and, among the remainder, only 18% were anticipatory, proactive actions. Partial correlation analysis showed that families with more frequent use of SMBG data had less parent-child conflict about diabetes, more diabetes knowledge, and better overall treatment adherence. Use of SMBG data was unrelated to objective indices of the need for treatment adjustments or to diabetic control. CONCLUSIONS: Most families made active use of their SMBG data, but few of these actions were proactive. Behavioral factors were stronger predictors of family use of SMBG data than were objective indices of the need for treatment adjustments. The results illustrate the need for further research on use of SMBG data and methods to enhance its impact on diabetic control.