Cargando…

Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the different experience of freestyle libre and finger pricks on clinical characteristics and glucose monitoring satisfaction (GMS) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using insulin pump (IP). METHODS: A prospective study was carried out on 47 (aged 17-21 years) T1D, who u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Al Hayek, Ayman A, Robert, Asirvatham A, Al Dawish, Mohamed A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31308786
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179551419861102
_version_ 1783431647715131392
author Al Hayek, Ayman A
Robert, Asirvatham A
Al Dawish, Mohamed A
author_facet Al Hayek, Ayman A
Robert, Asirvatham A
Al Dawish, Mohamed A
author_sort Al Hayek, Ayman A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the different experience of freestyle libre and finger pricks on clinical characteristics and glucose monitoring satisfaction (GMS) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using insulin pump (IP). METHODS: A prospective study was carried out on 47 (aged 17-21 years) T1D, who used conventional finger-pricking method for self-testing the glucose. The experiments were conducted between March 2018 and September 2018. For carrying out the study, the flash glucose monitoring (FGM) sensors were placed on each participant, at the baseline visit, by a trained diabetes educator. Furthermore, to determine the total number of scans conducted during the study period, the respective ambulatory glucose profiles were generated by computing the data collected from the sensors. In addition, a trained interviewer handed over the GMS questionnaire to each patient, at the baseline and at 12 weeks of the study. RESULTS: In comparison to the baseline (finger pricks), various parameters such as: HbA1c (P = .042), hypoglycemia (P = .001), mean capillary glucose (P = .004), total daily insulin dose (P = .0001), percentage of bolus insulin (P = .0001), daily bolus frequency (P = .0001), and daily carbohydrates intake (P = .0001) showed a significant improvement at 12 weeks. Similarly, substantial augmentation was noticed, in the sub domains of GMS, that is, openness (P = .0001), emotional burden (P = .0001), behavioral burden (P = .0001), and trust (P = .0001) at 12 weeks as compared to baseline. Overall, total GMS score at baseline was 1.72 ± 0.37, which increased up to 3.41 ± 0.49 (P = .0001) in the time period of 12 weeks. The HbA1c (r(2) = 0.45), hypoglycemia (r(2) = 0.58), and the mean number of FGM scans, exhibited a negative correlation, while GMS (r(2) = 0.52) and the mean number of FGM scans, exhibited a positive correlation. CONCLUSION: The frequency of hypoglycemia, HbA1c level, capillary glucose, daily carbohydrates intake decreased, while the total daily insulin dose, daily bolus insulin and total GMS score increased with the use of FGM scanning for 12 weeks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6604122
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66041222019-07-15 Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump Al Hayek, Ayman A Robert, Asirvatham A Al Dawish, Mohamed A Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes Original Article BACKGROUND: To evaluate the different experience of freestyle libre and finger pricks on clinical characteristics and glucose monitoring satisfaction (GMS) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using insulin pump (IP). METHODS: A prospective study was carried out on 47 (aged 17-21 years) T1D, who used conventional finger-pricking method for self-testing the glucose. The experiments were conducted between March 2018 and September 2018. For carrying out the study, the flash glucose monitoring (FGM) sensors were placed on each participant, at the baseline visit, by a trained diabetes educator. Furthermore, to determine the total number of scans conducted during the study period, the respective ambulatory glucose profiles were generated by computing the data collected from the sensors. In addition, a trained interviewer handed over the GMS questionnaire to each patient, at the baseline and at 12 weeks of the study. RESULTS: In comparison to the baseline (finger pricks), various parameters such as: HbA1c (P = .042), hypoglycemia (P = .001), mean capillary glucose (P = .004), total daily insulin dose (P = .0001), percentage of bolus insulin (P = .0001), daily bolus frequency (P = .0001), and daily carbohydrates intake (P = .0001) showed a significant improvement at 12 weeks. Similarly, substantial augmentation was noticed, in the sub domains of GMS, that is, openness (P = .0001), emotional burden (P = .0001), behavioral burden (P = .0001), and trust (P = .0001) at 12 weeks as compared to baseline. Overall, total GMS score at baseline was 1.72 ± 0.37, which increased up to 3.41 ± 0.49 (P = .0001) in the time period of 12 weeks. The HbA1c (r(2) = 0.45), hypoglycemia (r(2) = 0.58), and the mean number of FGM scans, exhibited a negative correlation, while GMS (r(2) = 0.52) and the mean number of FGM scans, exhibited a positive correlation. CONCLUSION: The frequency of hypoglycemia, HbA1c level, capillary glucose, daily carbohydrates intake decreased, while the total daily insulin dose, daily bolus insulin and total GMS score increased with the use of FGM scanning for 12 weeks. SAGE Publications 2019-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6604122/ /pubmed/31308786 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179551419861102 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Al Hayek, Ayman A
Robert, Asirvatham A
Al Dawish, Mohamed A
Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title_full Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title_fullStr Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title_full_unstemmed Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title_short Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump
title_sort differences of freestyle libre flash glucose monitoring system and finger pricks on clinical characteristics and glucose monitoring satisfactions in type 1 diabetes using insulin pump
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31308786
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179551419861102
work_keys_str_mv AT alhayekaymana differencesoffreestylelibreflashglucosemonitoringsystemandfingerpricksonclinicalcharacteristicsandglucosemonitoringsatisfactionsintype1diabetesusinginsulinpump
AT robertasirvathama differencesoffreestylelibreflashglucosemonitoringsystemandfingerpricksonclinicalcharacteristicsandglucosemonitoringsatisfactionsintype1diabetesusinginsulinpump
AT aldawishmohameda differencesoffreestylelibreflashglucosemonitoringsystemandfingerpricksonclinicalcharacteristicsandglucosemonitoringsatisfactionsintype1diabetesusinginsulinpump