Does self monitoring of blood glucose as opposed to urinalysis provide additional benefit in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes receiving structured education? The DESMOND SMBG randomised controlled trial protocol

BackgroundThe benefit of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people with type 2 diabetes on diet or oral agents other than sulphonylureas remains uncertain. Trials of interventions incorporating education about self-monitoring of blood glucose have reported mixed results. A recent systematic review concluded that SMBG was not cost-effective. However, what was unclear was whether a cheaper method of self-monitoring (such as urine glucose monitoring) could produce comparable benefit and patient acceptability for less cost.Methods/DesignThe DESMOND SMBG trial is comparing two monitoring strategies (blood glucose monitoring and urine testing) over 18 months when incorporated into a comprehensive self-management structured education programme. It is a multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial, conducted across 8 sites (7 primary care trusts) in England, UK involving individuals with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes.The trial has 80% power to demonstrate equivalence in mean HbA1c (the primary end-point) at 18 months of within ± 0.5% assuming 20% drop out and 20% non-consent. Secondary end-points include blood pressure, lipids, body weight and psychosocial measures as well as a qualitative sub-study.Practices were randomised to one of two arms: participants attend a DESMOND programme incorporating a module on self-monitoring of either urine or blood glucose. The programme is delivered by accredited educators who received specific training about equipoise. Biomedical data are collected and psychosocial scales completed at baseline, and 6, 12, and 18 months post programme. Qualitative research with participants and educators will explore views and experiences of the trial and preferences for methods of monitoring.DiscussionThe DESMOND SMBG trial is designed to provide evidence to inform the debate about the value of self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Strengths include a setting in primary care, a cluster design, a health economic analysis, a comparison of different methods of monitoring while controlling for other components of training within the context of a quality assured structured education programme and a qualitative sub-study

The value of episodic, intensive blood glucose monitoring in non-insulin treated persons with type 2 diabetes: Design of the Structured Testing Program (STeP) Study, a cluster-randomised, clinical trial [NCT00674986]

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The value and utility of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in non-insulin treated T2DM has yet to be clearly determined. Findings from studies in this population have been inconsistent, due mainly to design differences and limitations, including the prescribed frequency and timing of SMBG, role of the patient and physician in responding to SMBG results, inclusion criteria that may contribute to untoward floor effects, subject compliance, and cross-arm contamination. We have designed an SMBG intervention study that attempts to address these issues.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>The Structured Testing Program (STeP) study is a 12-month, cluster-randomised, multi-centre clinical trial to evaluate whether poorly controlled (HbA1c ≥ 7.5%), non-insulin treated T2DM patients will benefit from a comprehensive, integrated physician/patient intervention using structured SMBG in US primary care practices. Thirty-four practices will be recruited and randomly assigned to an active control group (ACG) that receives enhanced usual care or to an enhanced usual care group plus structured SMBG (STG). A total of 504 patients will be enrolled; eligible patients at each site will be randomly selected using a defined protocol. Anticipated attrition of 20% will yield a sample size of at least 204 per arm, which will provide a 90% power to detect a difference of at least 0.5% in change from baseline in HbA1c values, assuming a common standard deviation of 1.5%. Differences in timing and degree of treatment intensification, cost effectiveness, and changes in patient self-management behaviours, mood, and quality of life (QOL) over time will also be assessed. Analysis of change in HbA1c and other dependent variables over time will be performed using both intent-to-treat and per protocol analyses. Trial results will be available in 2010.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The intervention and trial design builds upon previous research by emphasizing appropriate and collaborative use of SMBG by both patients and physicians. Utilization of per protocol and intent-to-treat analyses facilitates a comprehensive assessment of the intervention. Use of practice site cluster-randomisation reduces the potential for intervention contamination, and inclusion criteria (HbA1c ≥ 7.5%) reduces the possibility of floor effects. Inclusion of multiple dependent variables allows us to assess the broader impact of the intervention, including changes in patient and physician attitudes and behaviours.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials NCT00674986.</p

Circulating Angiopoietins-1 and -2, Angiopoietin Receptor Tie-2 and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A as Biomarkers of Acute Myocardial Infarction: a Prospective Nested Case-Control Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Angiogenesis is up-regulated in myocardial ischemia. However, limited data exist assessing the value of circulating angiogenic biomarkers in predicting future incidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Our aim was to examine the association between circulating levels of markers of angiogenesis with risk of incident acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in men and women.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a case-control study (nested within a large cohort of persons receiving care within Kaiser Permanente of Northern California) including 695 AMI cases and 690 controls individually matched on age, gender and race/ethnicity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median [inter-quartile range] serum concentrations of vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A; 260 [252] vs. 235 [224] pg/mL; p = 0.01) and angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2; 1.18 [0.66] vs. 1.05 [0.58] ng/mL; p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in AMI cases than in controls. By contrast, endothelium-specific receptor tyrosine kinase (Tie-2; 14.2 [3.7] vs. 14.0 [3.1] ng/mL; p = 0.07) and angiopoietin-1 levels (Ang-1; 33.1 [13.6] vs. 32.5 [12.7] ng/mL; p = 0.52) did not differ significantly by case-control status. After adjustment for educational attainment, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, alcohol consumption, body mass index, LDL-C, HDL-C, triglycerides and C-reactive protein, each increment of 1 unit of Ang-2 as a Z score was associated with 1.17-fold (95 percent confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.35) increased odds of AMI, and the upper quartile of Ang-2, relative to the lowest quartile, was associated with 1.63-fold (95 percent confidence interval, 1.09 to 2.45) increased odds of AMI.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our data support a role of Ang-2 as a biomarker of incident AMI independent of traditional risk factors.</p

Impact of state mandatory insurance coverage on the use of diabetes preventive care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>46 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have passed laws and regulations mandating that health insurance plans cover diabetes treatment and preventive care. Previous research on state mandates suggested that these policies had little impact, since many health plans already covered the benefits. Here, we analyze the contents of and model the effect of state mandates. We examined how state mandates impacted the likelihood of using three types of diabetes preventive care: annual eye exams, annual foot exams, and performing daily self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We collected information on diabetes benefits specified in state mandates and time the mandates were enacted. To assess impact, we used data that the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System gathered between 1996 and 2000. 4,797 individuals with self-reported diabetes and covered by private insurance were included; 3,195 of these resided in the 16 states that passed state mandates between 1997 and 1999; 1,602 resided in the 8 states or the District of Columbia without state mandates by 2000. Multivariate logistic regression models (with state fixed effect, controlling for patient demographic characteristics and socio-economic status, state characteristics, and time trend) were used to model the association between passing state mandates and the usage of the forms of diabetes preventive care, both individually and collectively.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All 16 states that passed mandates between 1997 and 1999 required coverage of diabetic monitors and strips, while 15 states required coverage of diabetes self management education. Only 1 state required coverage of periodic eye and foot exams. State mandates were positively associated with a 6.3 (P = 0.04) and a 5.8 (P = 0.03) percentage point increase in the probability of privately insured diabetic patient's performing SMBG and simultaneous receiving all three preventive care, respectively; state mandates were not significantly associated with receiving annual diabetic eye (0.05 percentage points decrease, P = 0.92) or foot exams (2.3 percentage points increase, P = 0.45).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Effects of state mandates varied by preventive care type, with state mandates being associated with a small increase in SMBG. We found no evidence that state mandates were effective in increasing receipt of annual eye or foot exams. The small or non-significant effects might be attributed to small numbers of insured people not having the benefits prior to the mandates' passage. If state mandates' purpose is to provide improved benefits to many persons, policy makers should consider determining the number of people who might benefit prior to passing the mandate.</p

Primary versus secondary source of data in observational studies and heterogeneity in meta-analyses of drug effects: a survey of major medical journals

The data from individual observational studies included in meta-analyses of drug effects are collected either from ad hoc methods (i.e. "primary data") or databases that were established for non-research purposes (i.e. "secondary data"). The use of secondary sources may be prone to measurement bias and confounding due to over-the-counter and out-of-pocket drug consumption, or non-adherence to treatment. In fact, it has been noted that failing to consider the origin of the data as a potential cause of heterogeneity may change the conclusions of a meta-analysis. We aimed to assess to what extent the origin of data is explored as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses of observational studies.publishe

Diabetes Ther

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes represents a significant public health issue, with increasing prevalence in developing countries while adherence to insulin treatment remains a challenge. No studies have evaluated the relationship between adherence to insulin, diabetes-related distress, and trust in physician among persons with diabetes. Our objectives were to evaluate treatment adherence to insulin, emotional distress (using the Problem Areas in Diabetes Questionnaire, PAID), trust in physician, and to examine associations between them among Lebanese patients with diabetes. METHODS: This cross-sectional study, conducted in all districts of Lebanon between August 2016 and April 2017, enrolled 135 adult patients. RESULTS: The mean percentage score of adherence to insulin was 79.7 +/- 19.94. A significantly higher mean adherence score was found in non-sedentary (81.96) compared to sedentary patients (67.41) (p = 0.017), with no difference between gender, employment, rural vs non-rural residence, or familial history of diabetes. In addition, no significant relationship was seen between adherence score and education level, smoking, or alcohol intake. A significant positive association was found between trust in physician and adherence scores, whereas a significant but negative one was found between PAID and adherence scores. The results of linear regressions showed that a secondary level of education (beta = - 13.48) significantly decreased the trust in physician score, whereas the total number of oral antidiabetics (beta = 0.93) increased it. Having a sedentary lifestyle (beta = - 12.73) and smoking < 3 waterpipes/week compared to no smoking (beta = - 16.82) significantly decreased the adherence score. Female gender (beta = 10.46), smoking < 3 waterpipes (beta = 27.42) and 3 + waterpipes/week (beta = 17.95) significantly increased the PAID score. CONCLUSION: Trust in physician is associated with an increased adherence and with decreased diabetes-related distress. This distress was also associated with poor adherence in our study