Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2007 Sep;25(3):140-6.
doi: 10.1080/02813430701267413.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes

Anders Tengblad  1 , Ewa Grodzinsky, Kjell Lindström, Sigvard Mölstad, Lars Borgquist, Carl Johan Ostgren
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes

Anders Tengblad et al. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2007 Sep.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Design of the study. From a total population of 208 490 subjects all known patients with type 2 diabetics were surveyed and further analyses were made from a stratified randomized sample.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Glycaemic control measured by mean levels of HbA1c±1 SD in different treatment categories in 6495 patients with type 2 diabetes.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Scatter diagram of HbA1c (%) and frequency of test strips consumed the week prior to telephone interview, for 533 users of SMBG with type 2 diabetes.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33) Lancet. 1998;352:837–53. - PubMed
    1. Östgren CJ, Melander A, Råstam L, Lindblad U. Survival in patients with type 2 diabetes in a Swedish community. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:1297–1302. - PubMed
    1. Gaede P, Vedel P, Larsen N, Jensen G, Parving H, Pedersen O. Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with Type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:383–93. - PubMed
    1. American Diabetes Association. Consensus statement on self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care. 1987;10:95–7. - PubMed
    1. American Diabetes Association. Tests of glycemia in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:S91–S93. - PubMed

Publication types