People with Type Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) self-reported views on their own condition management reveal links to potentially improved outcomes and potential areas for service improvement.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Attitude to Health
Blood Glucose
/ analysis
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring
/ methods
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1
/ blood
Disease Management
Female
Glycated Hemoglobin
/ analysis
Humans
Hypoglycemia
/ blood
Hypoglycemic Agents
/ therapeutic use
Insulin
/ therapeutic use
Male
Middle Aged
Multivariate Analysis
Self Report
Self-Management
/ methods
Surveys and Questionnaires
Young Adult
Blood glucose
HbA1c
Monitoring
Patient experience
Survey
Type 1 diabetes
Journal
Diabetes research and clinical practice
ISSN: 1872-8227
Titre abrégé: Diabetes Res Clin Pract
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8508335
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
10
03
2020
revised:
10
09
2020
accepted:
21
09
2020
pubmed:
2
10
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
entrez:
1
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The self-management of type 1 diabetes (T1DM) has moved forward in many areas over the last 40 years. Our study asked people with T1DM what is their experience of blood glucose (BG) monitoring day to day and how this influences decisions about insulin dosing. An on-line self-reported questionnaire containing 44 questions prepared after consultation with clinicians and patients was circulated to people with T1DM 116 responders provided completed responses. Fixed responses were allocated specific values (e.g. not confident = 0 fairly confident = 1). Multivariate regression analysis was carried out. Only those 5 factors with p-value <0.05 were retained. 59% of respondents were >50 years old and 66% had diabetes for >20 years, with 63% of patients reporting HbA1c results ≤8% or 64 mmol/mol. Findings included; 75% used only 1 m; 56% had used the same meter for ≥3 years; 10% had tried flash monitors; 47% were concerned about current BG level; 85% were concerned about long-term impact of higher BG. 72% of respondents keep BG level high to avoid hypoglycaemia; 25% used ≥7 mmol/L as pre-meal BG target to calculate dose; 65% were concerned they might be over/under-dosing; 83% did not discuss accuracy when choosing meter. However 85% were confident in their meter's performance. The factors that linked to LOWER HbA1c included LESS units of basal insulin (p < 0.001), HIGHER number of daily BG tests (p = 0.008), LOWER bedtime blood glucose (p = 0.009), HIGHER patient's concern over long-term impact of high BG (BG) (p < 0.009 but LOWER patient's concern over current BG values (p = 0.009). The final statistical model could explain 41% of the observed variation in HbA1c. Many people still run their BG high to avoid hypoglycaemia. Concern about the longer-term consequences of suboptimal glycaemic control was associated with a lower HbA1c and is an area to explore in the future when considering how to help people with T1DM.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The self-management of type 1 diabetes (T1DM) has moved forward in many areas over the last 40 years. Our study asked people with T1DM what is their experience of blood glucose (BG) monitoring day to day and how this influences decisions about insulin dosing.
METHODS
METHODS
An on-line self-reported questionnaire containing 44 questions prepared after consultation with clinicians and patients was circulated to people with T1DM 116 responders provided completed responses. Fixed responses were allocated specific values (e.g. not confident = 0 fairly confident = 1). Multivariate regression analysis was carried out. Only those 5 factors with p-value <0.05 were retained.
RESULTS
RESULTS
59% of respondents were >50 years old and 66% had diabetes for >20 years, with 63% of patients reporting HbA1c results ≤8% or 64 mmol/mol. Findings included; 75% used only 1 m; 56% had used the same meter for ≥3 years; 10% had tried flash monitors; 47% were concerned about current BG level; 85% were concerned about long-term impact of higher BG. 72% of respondents keep BG level high to avoid hypoglycaemia; 25% used ≥7 mmol/L as pre-meal BG target to calculate dose; 65% were concerned they might be over/under-dosing; 83% did not discuss accuracy when choosing meter. However 85% were confident in their meter's performance. The factors that linked to LOWER HbA1c included LESS units of basal insulin (p < 0.001), HIGHER number of daily BG tests (p = 0.008), LOWER bedtime blood glucose (p = 0.009), HIGHER patient's concern over long-term impact of high BG (BG) (p < 0.009 but LOWER patient's concern over current BG values (p = 0.009). The final statistical model could explain 41% of the observed variation in HbA1c.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Many people still run their BG high to avoid hypoglycaemia. Concern about the longer-term consequences of suboptimal glycaemic control was associated with a lower HbA1c and is an area to explore in the future when considering how to help people with T1DM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33002551
pii: S0168-8227(20)30732-4
doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108479
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Blood Glucose
0
Glycated Hemoglobin A
0
Hypoglycemic Agents
0
Insulin
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
108479Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.