Testing versus guessing blood glucose values: impact on self-care behaviors in type 2 diabetes

Abstract Objective: To assess differences between estimated blood glucose values and those measured on a blood glucose meter and the impact on self-care behavior in type 2 diabetes. Research design and methods: Subjects ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes (N = 297) attending a Taking Control of Your Diabetes conference were asked questions about diabetes management and to estimate their current blood glucose. Study staff tested subjects’ blood glucose on a meter. After seeing the result, subjects were again asked questions on diabetes management. Clinical trial registration: NCT01453413. Main outcome measure: The percentage of subject blood glucose estimations that were outside ISO 15197:2003 accuracy criteria (>±15 mg/dL or >±20% of meter glucose values). Results: Nearly half (46%) of subjects estimated blood glucose values outside ISO 15197:2003 accuracy criteria. Time since last blood glucose test, time since last meal, testing frequency, and A1C did not have an effect on differences between estimated blood glucose values and meter results. In the questionnaire before blood glucose testing, most subjects strongly agreed, agreed, or neither agreed nor disagreed that ‘I make decisions about my diabetes, such as my food intake or my insulin dose even when I do not test my blood sugar’ (71%) and ‘My body tells me without testing if my blood sugar is low or high’ (77%). After blood glucose testing, 99% of subjects strongly agreed, agreed, or neither agreed nor disagreed that ‘Knowing my blood sugar by checking could help me make different diabetes decisions’. Conclusions: Self-monitoring of blood glucose is an important component of diabetes self-management. Testing rather than guessing blood glucose values is important to obtain accurate results and inform people with type 2 diabetes to make effective, appropriate diabetes management decisions. A potential limitation of this study is that the subject population may not be representative of the general population of people with diabetes; however, the conference setting may attract a more motivated population, which could underestimate the magnitude of the results.

[1]  A. Penfornis,et al.  Evolution of devices in diabetes management. , 2011, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[2]  M. Funnell,et al.  Empowerment: An Idea Whose Time Has Come in Diabetes Education , 1991, The Diabetes educator.

[3]  A. Penfornis Performance of a new reusable insulin pen. , 2011, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[4]  Bern Harrison,et al.  Accuracy of the CONTOUR® Blood Glucose Monitoring System , 2011, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[5]  Jennifer Y. Liu,et al.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes registry. , 2001, The American journal of medicine.

[6]  L. Geiss,et al.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose among adults with diabetes--United States, 1997-2006. , 2007, MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report.

[7]  Richard Hellman,et al.  Glucose meter inaccuracy and the impact on the care of patients , 2012, Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews.

[8]  T. Skinner,et al.  Four Theories and a Philosophy: Self-Management Education for Individuals Newly Diagnosed With Type 2 Diabetes , 2003 .

[9]  W. Fisher,et al.  Understanding Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Among Individuals With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes , 2011, The Diabetes educator.

[10]  D. Klonoff,et al.  Recommendations for standardizing glucose reporting and analysis to optimize clinical decision making in diabetes: the Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP). , 2013, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[11]  David Kerr,et al.  Consensus Report: The Current Role of Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes , 2011, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[12]  Christopher G Parkin,et al.  A structured self-monitoring of blood glucose approach in type 2 diabetes encourages more frequent, intensive, and effective physician interventions: results from the STeP study. , 2011, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[13]  W. Polonsky,et al.  The impact of structured blood glucose testing on attitudes toward self-management among poorly controlled, insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. , 2012, Diabetes research and clinical practice.

[14]  J. Ogden,et al.  Estimation of blood glucose levels by people with diabetes: a cross-sectional study. , 2005, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[15]  Bruce W Bode,et al.  Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) in insulin- and non-insulin-using adults with diabetes: consensus recommendations for improving SMBG accuracy, utilization, and research. , 2008, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[16]  Robert M. Anderson,et al.  From DSME to DSMS: Developing Empowerment-Based Diabetes Self-Management Support , 2007 .

[17]  G. Sartore,et al.  ROSES: role of self‐monitoring of blood glucose and intensive education in patients with Type 2 diabetes not receiving insulin. A pilot randomized clinical trial , 2011, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[18]  D. Lucido,et al.  Reliability of blood glucose monitoring by patients with diabetes mellitus. , 1984, The American journal of medicine.

[19]  S. Clarke,et al.  A history of blood glucose meters and their role in self-monitoring of diabetes mellitus , 2012, British journal of biomedical science.

[20]  G. Vincze,et al.  Factors Associated With Adherence to Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Among Persons With Diabetes , 2004, The Diabetes educator.

[21]  Christopher G. Parkin,et al.  Effective Use of Structured Self-Management of Blood Glucose in Type 2 Diabetes: Lessons From the STeP Study , 2011, Clinical Diabetes.

[22]  Robert M. Anderson,et al.  Patient empowerment: myths and misconceptions. , 2010, Patient education and counseling.