Dataset Information

The Efficacy and Frequency of Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-insulin-Treated T2D Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a useful tool in diabetes management, but its efficacy and optimal application in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients treated without insulin have been controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of SMBG in controlling blood glucose levels in non-insulin-treated T2D patients and to determine the optimal frequency and the most appropriate population to benefit from SMBG.

Methods

Eligible publications from January 2000 to April 2022 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Randomized controlled trials comparing SMBG with no SMBG or structured SMBG (S-SMBG, SMBG with defined timing and frequency of glucose measurements) were included. Meta-analyses and sub-analyses were performed to assess the efficacy, optimal frequency, and most appropriate population for SMBG. Risk of bias was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases.

Results

Twenty-two studies involving 6204 participants were identified, including 17 comparing SMBG with no SMBG and 4 comparing SMBG with S-SMBG. SMBG reduced HbA1c (MD -0.30%, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.17) compared with no SMBG, and S-SMBG performed better than SMBG (MD -0.23%, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.07). Subgroup analyses showed that HbA1c control was better with SMBG at 8-11 times weekly (MD -0.35%, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.20) compared with other frequencies and with lifestyle adjustments (MD -0.37%, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23) than with no adjustments. No significant differences in HbA1c were observed between baseline HbA1c subgroups (≤ 8% and > 8%, P = 0.63) and between diabetes duration subgroups (≤ 6 years and > 6 years, P = 0.72), respectively.

Discussion

SMBG was effective for controlling HbA1c in non-insulin-treated T2D patients, although lacking detailed monitoring design. Better outcomes were seen with SMBG at 8-11 times weekly and lifestyle adjustment based on SMBG results.

Trial registration

PROSPERO (CRD42021285604).

SUBMITTER: Zou Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9971532 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Efficacy and Frequency of Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-insulin-Treated T2D Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Zou Yue Y Zhao Sixuan S Li Guangyao G Zhang Chao C

Journal of general internal medicine 20221120 3

<h4>Background</h4>Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a useful tool in diabetes management, but its efficacy and optimal application in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients treated without insulin have been controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of SMBG in controlling blood glucose levels in non-insulin-treated T2D patients and to determine the optimal frequency and the most appropriate population to benefit from SMBG.<h4>Methods</h4>Eligible publications from January 2000 to April 2 ...[more]

PMID: 36403159

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMedical treatment options for type 2 diabetes (T2D) have increased over the last decade and enhance the possibility of individualised treatment strategies where insulin is still one of them. In spite of the advancements in treatment options, less than one-third of the population with T2D obtain their optimal glycaemic goal. In persons with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has shown to be the most important driver for improvement in glycaemic control, even more than insulin-pump therapy. The use of technology in T2D has only been investigated in few studies.The overall objective of the research study is to examine the effectiveness of the use of CGM versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in persons with insulin-treated T2D on glycaemic variables and patient-reported outcomes on treatment satisfaction, health behaviour and well-being. The independent effect of peer support will also be studied.Methods and analysisThe study is a single centre, prospective, randomised, open-labelled, three-armed study with the randomisation 2:1:2 in group A with CGM, group B with CGM and peer support, and group C as a control group with SMBG. The participants receive a training course unique for the allocation group. The study runs for 12 months and includes 100 adult participants with insulin-treated T2D, treated at the outpatient clinic at Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen. Primary outcome is difference in change in time in range. Recruitment begins in August 2020 and ends in July 2021. Final 12-month follow-up is anticipated to be in August 2022.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the Scientific Ethics Committee of the Capital Region (H-20000843). Data collection and handling will be performed in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation and is approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (J-2020-100). Dissemination will be in international peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a plain-language summary for participants.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04331444).Protocol versionV.3, 11 December 2020.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is considered of little clinical benefit for adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, but no comprehensive review of a structured approach to SMBG has been published to date.PurposeTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of sSMBG on HbA1c, treatment modifications, behavioral and psychosocial outcomes, and; examine the moderating effects of sSMBG protocol characteristics on HbA1c.Data sourcesFour databases searched (November 2020; updated: February 2022).Study selectionInclusion criteria: non-randomized and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies; reporting effect of sSMBG on stated outcomes; among adults (≥18 years) with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Studies excluded if involving children or people with insulin-treated or other forms of diabetes.Data extraction and analysisOutcome data extracted, and risk of bias/quality assessed independently by two researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted for RCTs, and moderators explored (HbA1c only).Data synthesisFrom 2,078 abstracts, k=23 studies were included (N=5,372). Risk of bias was evident and study quality was low. Outcomes assessed included: HbA1c (k=23), treatment modification (k=16), psychosocial/behavioral outcomes (k=12). Meta-analysis revealed a significant mean difference favoring sSMBG in HbA1c (-0·29%, 95% CI: -0·46 to -0·11, k=13) and diabetes self-efficacy (0.17%, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.33, k=2). Meta-analysis revealed no significant moderating effects by protocol characteristics.LimitationsFindings limited by heterogeneity in study designs, intervention characteristics, and psychosocial assessments.ConclusionA small positive effect of sSMBG on HbA1c and diabetes self-efficacy was observed. Narrative synthesis of sSMBG intervention characteristics may guide future implementation.Prospero registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020208857, identifier CRD42020208857.

Project description:Insulin is essential for the survival of people with type 1 diabetes and for better management of people with type 2 diabetes. People with diabetes using insulin also require self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) devices (e.g., meters, strips, continuous monitoring systems) for day-to-day management. It is essential to ensure that insulin and these devices are available and affordable. This study aimed to evaluate the availability, price, and affordability of insulin and SMBG devices in Indonesia using an adaptation of the World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) price survey. A total of 34 public health facilities (hospitals, primary healthcare centres/Puskesmas) and 37 private pharmacies were sampled. Information from three major online marketplaces was also collected. Prices were expressed as median patient prices (US$). Affordability was defined as the number of days' wages needed by the lowest paid unskilled government worker (LPGW) to purchase 30 days' supply of insulin, delivery devices and SMBGs. Availability of analogue insulin was slightly higher in public facilities (63.6%) than in the private sector (43.2%), with no human insulin available in both sectors. Conversely, better availability was observed in private facilities for SMBG devices as public sector facilities did not supply devices for self-testing. Median prices for 1000IU analogues varied between the public sector (US$ 5.26) and the private sector (US$11.24). The highest median price of analogues was seen in online marketplaces (US$ 28.65). The least costly median price of SMBG devices were observed in online platforms (meter: US$ 18.37, test strip: US$ 0.27, lancet: US$ 0.02). A low-income person had to work 2-3 days to buy 1000IU of analogues. It required 5-7 days' and 4-5 day's wages to purchase a meter and a month's supply of test strips, respectively. The availability and affordability of insulin and SMBG devices remain important issues in Indonesia requiring holistic approaches for further improvement.

Project description:IntroductionPublished evaluations of sensor glucose monitoring use in insulin treated type 2 diabetes are limited. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of flash glucose-sensing technology as a replacement for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) over a 12-month period in participants with type 2 diabetes who were on intensive insulin therapy.MethodsAn open-label, randomized, controlled study in adults with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy from 26 European diabetes centers aimed at assessing flash glucose sensing technology was conducted. Participants (N = 224) were randomized (1:2 respectively) to a control group (n = 75) that used SMBG (FreeStyle Lite™) or to an intervention group (n = 149) which used sensor glucose data (FreeStyle Libre™ Flash Glucose Monitoring System) for self-management over 6 months. All intervention group participants who completed the 6-month treatment phase continued into an additional 6-month open-access phase.ResultsA total of 139 intervention participants completed the 6-month treatment phase and continued into the open-access phase. At 12 months (end of open-access period), time in hypoglycemia [sensor glucose <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL)] was reduced by 50% compared to baseline [-0.70 ± 1.85/24 h (mean ± standard deviation); p = 0.0002]. Nocturnal hypoglycemia [2300 to 0600 hours, <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL)] was reduced by 52%; p = 0.0002. There was no change in time in range [sensor glucose 3.9-10.0 mmol/L (70-180 mg/dL)]. SMBG testing fell from a mean of 3.9 (median 3.9) times/day at baseline to 0.2 (0.0), with an average frequency of sensor scanning of 7.1 (5.7) times/day at 12 months, and mean sensor utilization was 83.6 ± 13.8% (median 88.3%) during the open-access phase. During this 6-month extension period no device-related serious adverse events were reported. Nine participants reported 16 instances of device-related adverse events (e.g. infection, allergy) and 28 participants (20.1%) experienced 134 occurrences of anticipated skin symptoms/sensor-insertion events expected with device use (e.g. erythema, itching and rash).ConclusionThe use of flash glucose-sensing technology for glycemic management in individuals with type 2 diabetes treated by intensive insulin therapy over 12 months was associated with a sustained reduction in hypoglycemia and safely and effectively replaced SMBG.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02082184.

Dataset Information

The Efficacy and Frequency of Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-insulin-Treated T2D Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

The Efficacy and Frequency of Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-insulin-Treated T2D Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets