liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes
Linköping University, Department of Department of Health and Society, General Practice. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
Linköping University, Department of Department of Health and Society, General Practice. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Local Health Care Services in the West of Östergötland, Unit of Research and Development in Local Health Care, County of Östergötland.
Unit of Research and Development in Primary Care, County of Jönköping, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, General Practice. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
Show others and affiliations
2007 (English)In: Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, ISSN 0281-3432, E-ISSN 1502-7724, Vol. 25, no 3, 140-146 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown inconsistent results with regard to whether or not self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is related to better glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes. The aim of this study was to explore the use of SMBG and its association with glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care.

DESIGN: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in 2003 at 18 primary health care centres in Sweden, in which all known patients with diabetes were surveyed. The study included 6495 patients with type 2 diabetes. A sample of 896 patients was selected for further exploration of data from medical records. A telephone interview was performed with all patients in this group using SMBG (533 patients).

RESULTS: There were no differences in HbA1c levels between users (6.9%) and non-users (6.8%) of SMBG in patients treated with insulin or in patients treated with oral agents (6.3% in both groups). In patients treated with diet only, users of SMBG had higher levels of HbA1c compared with non-users (5.5% vs. 5.4%, p =0.002). Comparing medical records between users and non-users of SMBG showed no differences in diabetes-related complications in any treatment category group.

CONCLUSION: The use of SMBG was not associated with improved glycaemic control in any therapy category of patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care. The absence of difference in glycaemic control between users and non-users of SMBG could not be explained by differences in comorbidity between users and non-users of SMBG.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 25, no 3, 140-146 p.
Keyword [en]
Family practice, glycaemic control, primary care, self-monitoring, type 2 diabetes
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-20577DOI: 10.1080/02813430701267413PubMedID: 17846931OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-20577DiVA: diva2:235275
Available from: 2009-09-15 Created: 2009-09-15 Last updated: 2017-12-13Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Monitoring blood glucose and obesity in type 2 diabetes in primary care
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Monitoring blood glucose and obesity in type 2 diabetes in primary care
2009 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Background: Type 2 diabetes is a common chronic disease worldwide. An important part of the treatment is monitoring and treating the elevated levels of blood glucose. But there is also a need for monitoringother risk factors that confer an increased risk for vascular complications. This thesis is based on four studies that explore different aspectsof monitoring blood glucose and obesity in patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care.

Methods: To examine the cost and effect on glycaemic control of patients performing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) an observationalstudy was performed in the county of Östergötland and Jönköping 2003-2004. The study included all known patients with type 2 diabetes at 18 primary health care centres (PHCC), excluding patients in nursery homes.

A structured observational intervention study of 98 patients with type 2 diabetes living at 17 nursery homes were done with monitoringof hypoglycaemic episodes followed by a controlled withdrawal of diabetes medication in patients with HbA1c ≤ 6.0 %.

Baseline data from the cohort study; Cardiovascularrisk in type 2 diabetes – a prospectivestudy in primary care (CARDIPP), was analysed for correlation analyses between anthropometric status and early cardiovascular organ damage, measured by pulse wave velocity (PWV) and left ventricular mass index (LVMI).

Results: When comparing users of SMBG to non-users, there was no association between improvedglycaemic control and use of SMBG. A plasma glucose profile for three consecutive days of the patients at nursery homes, indentified 31 episodes of plasma glucose levels≤ 4.4 mmol/l. A withdrawal of insulin and oral antiglycaemic medicine was performed, which after 3 months follow up was successful in 24 (75 %) of the patients.

The mean annual cost per PHCC for visits to general practitioner and nurse, insulin, SMBG and oral antiglycaemic agents was586 € (SD 435) per patient. There was no correlationbetween costs and glycaemic control at PHCC level.

In the CARDIPP study, both increased sagittalabdominal diameter and increased waist circumference were, independently of sex, age, blood pressure and HbA1c, associated to increasedPWV and LVMI.

Conclusions: Use of SMBG in primary care confers a substantialpart of the treatment costs, but is not associated with improved glycaemic control. Systematic use of SMBG for patients not treated with insulin should not be recommended. At nursery homes, patients with type 2 diabetes are at risk for harmful hypoglycaemia and may benefit from a more frequent control of plasma glucose and a less strict glycaemic control.

Increased abdominal obesity measured with either sagittal abdominal diameter or waist circumference is associated with early cardiovascularorgan damage. In addition to analyses of blood glucose, blood pressure and lipids, the monitoring of abdominal obesity is a feasible risk factor assessment tool, that provides further information about cardiovascular risk that goes beyond that of traditional risk factors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2009. 55 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1140
Keyword
Diabetes, primary care
National Category
Family Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-20049 (URN)978-91-7393-573-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2009-09-18, Originalet, Qulturumhuset, Länssjukhuset Ryhov, Jönköping, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2009-09-15 Created: 2009-08-26 Last updated: 2010-03-02Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedLink to Ph.D. Thesis

Authority records BETA

Tengblad, AndersGrodzinsky, EwaMölstad, SigvardBorgquist, LarsÖstgren, Carl Johan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Tengblad, AndersGrodzinsky, EwaMölstad, SigvardBorgquist, LarsÖstgren, Carl Johan
By organisation
General PracticeFaculty of Health SciencesUnit of Research and Development in Local Health Care, County of ÖstergötlandGeneral PracticeWest County Primary Health Care
In the same journal
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 113 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf