| Literature DB >> 32206014 |
Ayman A Al Hayek1, Asirvatham A Robert1, Mohamed A Al Dawish1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the current era of modern technology, the development of smart devices such as the flash glucose monitoring (FGM) systems helps patients with diabetes to effortlessly monitor their glucose levels more frequently. In this study, we determine the user acceptability of FGM among young patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).Entities:
Keywords: Acceptability; FreeStyle Libre; diabetes treatment; flash glucose monitoring; skin adverse events; type 1 diabetes
Year: 2020 PMID: 32206014 PMCID: PMC7076574 DOI: 10.1177/1179551420910122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes ISSN: 1179-5514
Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of the study population.
| Variable | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 37 | 55.2 |
| Female | 30 | 44.8 |
| Age | ||
| <15 y | 35 | 52.2 |
| ⩾15 y | 32 | 47.8 |
| BMI | ||
| Normal | 41 | 61.2 |
| Overweight | 19 | 28.4 |
| Obese | 7 | 10.4 |
| Diabetes duration | ||
| <5 y | 39 | 58.2 |
| ⩾5 y | 28 | 41.8 |
| Treatment | ||
| IP | 23 | 34.3 |
| MDI | 44 | 65.7 |
| HbA1c % | ||
| ⩽7 | 41 | 61.2 |
| >7 | 26 | 38.8 |
| Hypoglycemia (episodes/month) | ||
| 0 | 4 | 6 |
| 1 | 12 | 17.9 |
| 2 | 13 | 19.4 |
| 3 | 11 | 16.4 |
| 4 | 11 | 16.4 |
| 5 | 11 | 16.4 |
| >5 | 5 | 7.5 |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; IP, Insulin pump; MDI, Multiple dose injection.
Skin adverse events for FreeStyle Libre sensor adhesive.
| Skin complications | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
| Local itching | 12 | 17.9 |
| Scar at the insertion site | 7 | 10.4 |
| Local erythema | 13 | 19.4 |
| Bruise formation | 6 | 9 |
| Local bleeding | 2 | 2.9 |
| Local pain | 6 | 8.9 |
| Skin discoloration | 17 | 25.4 |
The overall user acceptability response of the study population.
| Q | User acceptability Questionnaire (Q) | Strongly Agree (Painless) (n, %) | Agree (Almost Painless) (n, %) | Neither Agree or Disagree (Slight Pain) (N, %) | Disagree (Moderate Pain) (N, %) | Strongly Disagree (Severe Pain) (N, %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensor application | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 | Applying the sensor was less painful than a routine finger-stick | 64 (95.5) | 1 (1.5) | 2 (3) | 0 | 0 |
| Sensor wear and use | ||||||
| 2 | The sensor was comfortable to wear | 57 (85) | 4 (6) | 5 (7.47) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 3 | The sensor was easy to wear due to its small size | 63 (94) | 2 (3) | 2 (3) | 0 | 0 |
| 4 | I believe that the other people did not notice that I wearing a sensor | 32 (47.8) | 12 (17.9) | 10 (14.9) | 13 (19.4) | 0 |
| 5 | While wearing the sensor, I didn’t feel any discomfort under my skin | 47 (70.1) | 12 (17.9) | 8 (11.9) | 0 | 0 |
| 6 | I was able to scan the sensor without people noticing | 54 (80.6) | 10 (14.9) | 2 (3) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 7 | The sensor did not get in the way of my daily activities | 60 (89.6) | 5 (7.5) | 2 (3) | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | The sensor fits in well with my life | 61 (91) | 6 (9) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 9 | Getting a glucose reading with a scan was easy | 53 (79.1) | 8 (11.9) | 4(6) | 2 (3) | 0 |
| 10 | I feel getting glucose reading from this system would not interrupt my daily activities | 60 (89.6) | 6 (9) | 1 (1.5) | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | I would be excited to share my experience with this system with others | 51 (76.1) | 8 (11.9) | 5 (7.5) | 3 (4.5) | 0 |
| Comparisons to SMBG | ||||||
| 12 | Getting glucose readings from the sensor is less painful than getting glucose readings with finger pricks | 56 (83.6) | 9 (13.4) | 1(1.5) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 13 | Getting glucose readings from the sensor is more discreet than blood glucose testing | 56 (83.6) | 8 (11.9) | 2 (3) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 14 | Scanning the sensor to get glucose reading is more comfortable than doing a finger prick to get a reading | 57 (85.1) | 9 (13.4) | 1 (1.5) | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | Checking my glucose readings by scanning with the sensor with this system is easier than with other glucose monitoring system I have used | 64 (95.5) | 3 (4.5) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | Checking my glucose readings by scanning with the sensor is faster than with a blood glucose meter | 55 (82.1) | 6 (9) | 6 (9) | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | This system offers an easy and simple way to get my glucose reading without pricking my finger | 53 (79.1) | 11 (20.9) | 2 (3) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 18 | This system offers a more private testing experience than a blood glucose meter | 59 (88.1) | 7 (10.4) | 1 (1.5) | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | I feel getting a glucose reading with a scan is less stressful than a finger prick | 52 (77.6) | 13 (19.4) | 2 (3) | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | I feel the system would reduce the hassle of glucose monitoring | 50 (74.6) | 13 (19.4) | 2 (3) | 1 (1.5) | 1 (1.5) |
| Level of pain experienced using the FreeStyle Libre FGM (sensor application wear and use) | ||||||
| 21 | Applying the sensor | 58 (86.6) | 6 (8.9) | 2 (3) | 1 (1.5) | 0 |
| 22 | When obtaining glucose readings by scanning the sensor | 61 (91) | 4 (6) | 2 (3) | 0 | 0 |
Abbreviations: FGM, flash glucose monitoring; SMBG, self-monitoring of blood glucose.
Figure 1.Total user acceptability score of the study population. BMI indicates body mass index; FSL, FreeStyle Libre.
Results of regression analyses with β-coefficient and 95% confidence interval for total user acceptability score.
| Variable |
| 95% CL | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| (Constant) | 94.1 | 88.386 | 99.962 | 32.5 | .000 |
| Age | −.724 | −2.198 | .750 | −.982 | .330 |
| Gender | .777 | −.734 | 2.289 | 1.029 | .308 |
| BMI | .062 | −1.105 | 1.228 | .106 | .916 |
| Diabetes duration | −.363 | −1.928 | 1.202 | −.464 | .644 |
| Treatment type | −.329 | −1.955 | 1.297 | −.404 | .687 |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CL, confidence interval.