Abstract
Although self monitoring of blood glucose is accepted to be effective in lowering Hb A1c levels in insulin-treated diabetic patients, any benefit in non-insulin-treated patients remains controversial. Observational studies cannot answer this question because of either patient self selection (individuals with healthier life styles chose to perform more SMBG) or physician self selection (patients in poorer control are asked to perform SMBG). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide the answer. Of the 14 published bona fide RCTs, nine show no benefit in lowering Hb A1c levels. In four of the five positive ones, the SMBG group received more intensive education and/or treatment than the control group. In the one in which patients in both groups were followed similarly, over 500 patients were required to produce a statistically significant difference of 0.2% favoring SMBG, the clinical significance of which is debatable. Thus, there is scant evidence that very expensive SMBG in non-insulin-treated patients is effective in lowering Hb A1c levels. This lack of benefit argues for redirecting these resources into areas of diabetes care where strong evidence exists for improving diabetes outcomes.
Keywords: Self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-insulin-treated patients
Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials
Title: Evaluation of Self Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-Insulin-Treated Diabetic Patients by Randomized Controlled Trials: Little Bang for the Buck
Volume: 5 Issue: 3
Author(s): Mayer B. Davidson
Affiliation:
Keywords: Self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-insulin-treated patients
Abstract: Although self monitoring of blood glucose is accepted to be effective in lowering Hb A1c levels in insulin-treated diabetic patients, any benefit in non-insulin-treated patients remains controversial. Observational studies cannot answer this question because of either patient self selection (individuals with healthier life styles chose to perform more SMBG) or physician self selection (patients in poorer control are asked to perform SMBG). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide the answer. Of the 14 published bona fide RCTs, nine show no benefit in lowering Hb A1c levels. In four of the five positive ones, the SMBG group received more intensive education and/or treatment than the control group. In the one in which patients in both groups were followed similarly, over 500 patients were required to produce a statistically significant difference of 0.2% favoring SMBG, the clinical significance of which is debatable. Thus, there is scant evidence that very expensive SMBG in non-insulin-treated patients is effective in lowering Hb A1c levels. This lack of benefit argues for redirecting these resources into areas of diabetes care where strong evidence exists for improving diabetes outcomes.
Export Options
About this article
Cite this article as:
B. Davidson Mayer, Evaluation of Self Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-Insulin-Treated Diabetic Patients by Randomized Controlled Trials: Little Bang for the Buck, Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials 2010; 5 (3) . https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/157488710792007248
DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/157488710792007248 |
Print ISSN 1574-8871 |
Publisher Name Bentham Science Publisher |
Online ISSN 1876-1038 |
- Author Guidelines
- Graphical Abstracts
- Fabricating and Stating False Information
- Research Misconduct
- Post Publication Discussions and Corrections
- Publishing Ethics and Rectitude
- Increase Visibility of Your Article
- Archiving Policies
- Peer Review Workflow
- Order Your Article Before Print
- Promote Your Article
- Manuscript Transfer Facility
- Editorial Policies
- Allegations from Whistleblowers
Related Articles
-
Epidemiology and Costs of Hypertension-related Disorders
Current Pharmaceutical Design Role of Insulin Signaling in the Interaction Between Alzheimer Disease and Diabetes Mellitus: A Missing Link to Therapeutic Potential
Current Aging Science Relationships of Beta2- and Beta3--Adrenoceptor Polymorphisms with Obesity, Hypertension and Metabolic Syndrome
Current Hypertension Reviews Mechanisms of Diabetic Dyslipidemia: Relevance for Atherogenesis
Current Vascular Pharmacology Transplacental Transfer of Antiretroviral Drugs and Newborn Birth Weight in HIV-Infected Pregnant Women
Current HIV Research ATP-Binding Cassette Transporters A1 and G1, HDL Metabolism, Cholesterol Efflux, and Inflammation: Important Targets for the Treatment of Atherosclerosis
Current Drug Targets Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (CD26): Knowing the Function before Inhibiting the Enzyme
Current Medicinal Chemistry Autoantibodies Associated with Psychiatric Disorders
Current Neurovascular Research Antiplatelet Therapy and Oral Anticoagulation for Prevention of Ischemic Stroke
Current Drug Therapy Antioxidant Activity of Galantamine and Some of its Derivatives
Current Medicinal Chemistry The Role of Unbound Drug in Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics and in Therapy
Current Pharmaceutical Design Development and Clinical use of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor
Current Pharmaceutical Design Current Trends and Future Strategies for the Global Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic
Coronaviruses Pegaptanib Sodium for the Treatment of Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy and Diabetic Macular Edema
Current Diabetes Reviews Redox Status in Periodontal and Systemic Inflammatory Conditions Including Associated Neoplasias: Antioxidants as Adjunctive Therapy?
Infectious Disorders - Drug Targets Biologics: An Update and Challenge of Their Pharmacokinetics
Current Drug Metabolism Dyslipidemia as a Risk Factor for Ischemic Stroke
Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry Editorial [Hot topic:The Two Faces of High-Density Lipoprotein (Executive Editor: Sophie Van Linthout)]
Current Pharmaceutical Design Elevated Serum Human Cytomegalovirus IgM Levels in the Acute Phase of Ischemic Stroke are Associated with Increased Risk of Death and Major Disability
Current Neurovascular Research Physical Activity and Insulin Resistance
Current Nutrition & Food Science