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
. 2010 Sep;12(9):679-84.
doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0015.

Validation of measures of satisfaction with and impact of continuous and conventional glucose monitoring

Collaborators

Validation of measures of satisfaction with and impact of continuous and conventional glucose monitoring

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010 Sep.

Abstract

Background: The evaluation of patient-reported outcomes (e.g. impact, satisfaction) is important in trials of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). We evaluated psychometric properties of the CGM Satisfaction Scale (CGM-SAT) and the Glucose Monitoring Survey (GMS).

Methods: CGM-SAT is a 44-item scale on which patients (n=224) or parents (n=102) rated their experience with CGM over the prior 6 months. GMS is a 22-item scale on which patients (n=447) or parents (n=221) rated the blood glucose monitoring system they were using (home glucose meter with or without CGM) at baseline and 6 months.

Results: The alpha coefficient for the CGM-SAT was > or = 0.94 for all respondents and for the GMS was > or = 0.84 for all respondents at baseline and 6 months. Parent-youth agreement was 0.52 for the CGM-SAT at 6 months and 0.24 and 0.20 for the GMS at baseline and 6 months for the Standard Care Group, respectively. Test-retest reliability of the GMS at 6 months for controls was r=0.76 for adult patients, 0.63 for pediatric patients, and 0.43 for parents. Factor analysis isolated measurement factors for the CGM-SAT labeled Benefits of CGM and Hassles of CGM, accounting for 33% and 9% of score variance, respectively. For the GMS, two factors emerged: Glucose Control and Social Complications, accounting for 28% and 9% of variance, respectively. Significant correlations of CGM-SAT with frequency of CGM use between 6 months and baseline and GMS with frequency of conventional daily self-monitoring of blood glucose at baseline support their convergent validity.

Conclusions: The CGM-SAT and GMS are reliable and valid measures of patient-reported CGM outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Klonoff DC. Continuous glucose monitoring: roadmap for 21st century diabetes therapy. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:1231–1239. - PubMed
    1. Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) Study Group. Accuracy of the modified Continous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS) sensor in an outpatient setting: results from a Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7:109–114. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) Study Group. The accuracy of the Guardian RT continuous glucose monitor in children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2008;10:266–272. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diabetes Research in Children Network Study Group. The accuracy of the FreeStyle Navigator™ Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:59–64. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diabetes Research in Children Network Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring in children with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr. 2007;151:388–393. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms