Evaluation of a Diabetes Remote Monitoring Program Facilitated by Connected Glucose Meters for Patients With Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Crossover Trial

Background Patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) experience increased morbidity, increased mortality, and higher cost of care. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a critical component of diabetes self-management with established diabetes outcome benefits. Technological advancements in blood glucose meters, including cellular-connected devices that automatically upload SMBG data to secure cloud-based databases, allow for improved sharing and monitoring of SMBG data. Real-time monitoring of SMBG data presents opportunities to provide timely support to patients that is responsive to abnormal SMBG recordings. Such diabetes remote monitoring programs can provide patients with poorly controlled T2D additional support needed to improve critical outcomes. Objective To evaluate 6 months of a diabetes remote monitoring program facilitated by cellular-connected glucose meter, access to a diabetes coach, and support responsive to abnormal blood glucose recordings greater than 400 mg/dL or below 50 mg/dL in adults with poorly controlled T2D. Methods Patients (N=119) receiving care at a diabetes center of excellence participated in a two-arm, 12-month randomized crossover study. The intervention included a cellular-connected glucose meter and phone-based diabetes coaching provided by Livongo Health. The coach answered questions, assisted in goal setting, and provided support in response to abnormal glucose levels. One group received the intervention for 6 months before returning to usual care (IV/UC). The other group received usual care before enrolling in the intervention (UC/IV) for 6 months. Change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was the primary outcome, and change in treatment satisfaction was the secondary outcome. Results Improvements in mean HbA1c were seen in both groups during the first 6 months (IV/UC −1.1%, SD 1.5 vs UC/IV −0.8%, SD 1.5; P<.001). After crossover, there was no significant change in HbA1c in IV/UC (mean HbA1c change +0.2, SD 1.7, P=.41); however, those in UC/IV showed further improvement (mean HbA1c change −0.4%, SD 1.0, P=.008). A mixed-effects model showed no significant treatment effect (IV vs UC) over 12 months (P=.06). However, participants with higher baseline HbA1c and those in the first time period experienced greater improvements in HbA1c. Both groups reported similar improvements in treatment satisfaction throughout the study. Conclusions Patients enrolled in the diabetes remote monitoring program intervention experienced improvements in HbA1c and treatment satisfaction similar to usual care at a specialty diabetes center. Future studies on diabetes remote monitoring programs should incorporate scheduled coaching components and involve family members and caregivers. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03124043; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03124043

[1]  T. Dunning,et al.  Utilising clinical settings to identify and respond to the social determinants of health of individuals with type 2 diabetes—A review of the literature , 2019, Health & social care in the community.

[2]  Yannis Pappas,et al.  The impact of telehealth remote patient monitoring on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials , 2018, BMC Health Services Research.

[3]  R. Istepanian,et al.  m-Health interventions for diabetes remote monitoring and self management: clinical and compliance issues. , 2018, mHealth.

[4]  Janelle Downing,et al.  Use of a Connected Glucose Meter and Certified Diabetes Educator Coaching to Decrease the Likelihood of Abnormal Blood Glucose Excursions: The Livongo for Diabetes Program , 2017, Journal of medical Internet research.

[5]  I. Harman-boehm,et al.  Adherence to Self-Care Behaviors among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes-The Role of Risk Preferences. , 2016, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[6]  Matthew J Crowley,et al.  Practical Telemedicine for Veterans with Persistently Poor Diabetes Control: A Randomized Pilot Trial. , 2016, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[7]  L. Lenert,et al.  Pharmacist-provided diabetes management and education via a telemonitoring program. , 2015, Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhA.

[8]  G. Gensini,et al.  A Randomized Trial on Home Telemonitoring for the Management of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. , 2015, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[9]  Sanjay Arora,et al.  Trial to examine text message-based mHealth in emergency department patients with diabetes (TExT-MED): a randomized controlled trial. , 2014, Annals of emergency medicine.

[10]  Clare Bradley,et al.  Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire: (DTSQ) , 2013 .

[11]  K. Iwasaki,et al.  Medical Claim Cost Impact of Improved Diabetes Control for Medicare and Commercially Insured Patients with Type 2 Diabetes , 2013, Journal of managed care pharmacy : JMCP.

[12]  B. Quinn Diabetes Technology, Innovation, and the U.S. Health Insurance System , 2013, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[13]  Craig R. Fox,et al.  Using Insights From Behavioral Economics and Social Psychology to Help Patients Manage Chronic Diseases , 2013, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[14]  Stuart A. Ross,et al.  Effect of Internet Therapeutic Intervention on A1C Levels in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Insulin , 2010, Diabetes Care.

[15]  M. Sevick,et al.  Active Care Management Supported by Home Telemonitoring in Veterans With Type 2 Diabetes , 2009, Diabetes Care.

[16]  American Association of Diabetes Educators AADE Guidelines for the Practice of Diabetes Self-Management Education and Training (DSME/T) , 2009 .

[17]  P. Harris,et al.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support , 2009, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[18]  C. Quinn,et al.  WellDoc mobile diabetes management randomized controlled trial: change in clinical and behavioral outcomes and patient and physician satisfaction. , 2008, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[19]  Andrew J Karter,et al.  Missed Appointments and Poor Glycemic Control: An Opportunity to Identify High-Risk Diabetic Patients , 2004, Medical care.

[20]  M. Al-Azri,et al.  The association between satisfaction with services provided in primary care and outcomes in Type 2 diabetes mellitus , 2003, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[21]  R. Holman,et al.  Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  Simon J. Griffin,et al.  Lost to follow‐up: the problem of defaulters from diabetes clinics , 1998, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[23]  B. Anderson,et al.  Clinic Attendance and Glycemic Control: Study of Contrasting Groups of Patients With IDDM , 1991, Diabetes Care.

[24]  P. Nutting Health promotion in primary medical care: problems and potential. , 1986, Preventive medicine.

[25]  Tiffany C. Veinot,et al.  Transforming consumer health informatics through a patient work framework: connecting patients to context , 2015, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[26]  C. Quinn,et al.  CONSORT-EHEALTH Checklist V1.6.2 Report , 2015 .

[27]  Christopher,et al.  Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Signi fi cantly Reduces A 1 C Levels in Poorly Controlled , Noninsulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes Results from the Structured Testing Program study , 2011 .

[28]  J. Browne,et al.  Health and Quality of Life , 2007 .

[29]  E. Deci,et al.  Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[30]  S. Iliffe,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Open Access the Hawthorne Effect: a Randomised, Controlled Trial , 2007 .