S M Strowig1, P Raskin. 1. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Dallas 75235-8858, USA. sstrow@mednet.swmed.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect on glycemic control in intensively treated type 1 diabetic patients using a blood glucose meter with storage capability and computer-assisted analyses. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Glycemic control was assessed in 22 intensively treated adults with type 1 diabetes for 12 months while using a meter without memory, followed by 12 months while using a meter with memory. Log books were used to assist patients in managing aspects of the diabetes treatment plan during the first 12-month period, and computer-assisted analyses were used when the meter with memory was used. GHb levels were measured monthly throughout the 24 months of observation. RESULTS: The mean GHb level averaged across all patients during the period of memory meter use (6.4%) was significantly lower than that during the period of meter use without memory (6.9%) (P=0.0004). The change in GHb levels from each period-specific baseline level occurred at significantly different slopes (P=0.046) when adjusted for baseline GHb level. In addition, the downward trend in GHb level was greater in those patients who increased the frequency of testing the most (r=-0.54, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a meter with memory in conjunction with computer-generated analyses of stored blood glucose test results can lead to improved glycemic control when used by a group of intensively treated adult diabetic patients. Improvement in glycemic control was related to frequency of blood glucose testing.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect on glycemic control in intensively treated type 1 diabeticpatients using a blood glucose meter with storage capability and computer-assisted analyses. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Glycemic control was assessed in 22 intensively treated adults with type 1 diabetes for 12 months while using a meter without memory, followed by 12 months while using a meter with memory. Log books were used to assist patients in managing aspects of the diabetes treatment plan during the first 12-month period, and computer-assisted analyses were used when the meter with memory was used. GHb levels were measured monthly throughout the 24 months of observation. RESULTS: The mean GHb level averaged across all patients during the period of memory meter use (6.4%) was significantly lower than that during the period of meter use without memory (6.9%) (P=0.0004). The change in GHb levels from each period-specific baseline level occurred at significantly different slopes (P=0.046) when adjusted for baseline GHb level. In addition, the downward trend in GHb level was greater in those patients who increased the frequency of testing the most (r=-0.54, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a meter with memory in conjunction with computer-generated analyses of stored blood glucose test results can lead to improved glycemic control when used by a group of intensively treated adult diabeticpatients. Improvement in glycemic control was related to frequency of blood glucose testing.