Comparison of different models of diabetes care on compliance with self-monitoring of blood glucose by memory glucometer.

The modern management of diabetes relies heavily on self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), and therefore SMBG records are an important source of clinical data for management decision making. The development of a memory Glucometer has provided the opportunity to verify the validity of glucose records thus generated and observe the effects of different educational approaches on compliance with SMBG. Thirty-four patients without previous experience of SMBG were randomized into one of the following experimental groups differing in the model of diabetes care: mutual decision making, didactic, and authoritarian. Patients, unaware of the memory capacity of the glucose meter, were required to perform four glucose measurements per day over a 14-day observation period. Patient-generated blood glucose records were then compared with objective records stored in the glucose-meter memory. Patients with gestational diabetes mellitus recorded a lower proportion of correct results (63 vs. 79%, P = .049) and exhibited a tendency to invent results with lower blood glucose levels (5.3 vs. 7.5 mM, P less than .0001) than the results omitted compared with patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Predictors of greater validity of records were perceived intelligence of the subject (chi 2 = 4.56, P less than .02) and private health-insurance status (chi 2 = 4.52, P less than .04), whereas the experimental group assignment was not significant. These findings reflect potential motivational and sociodemographic limitations in the validity of SMBG recordings within the management and education of patients with gestational and nongestational diabetes.

Development of the diabetes knowledge (DKN) scales: forms DKNA, DKNB, and DKNC.

The Diabetes Knowledge Assessment (DKN) scales were developed to meet a specific need for rapid and reliable knowledge assessment in diabetic patients. Item format and item selection from an initial pool of 89 items were determined by pilot-testing over 300 diabetic subjects. Reliability analysis of the resulting 40 multiple-choice items, with a further sample of 56 subjects, gave a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.92. Parallel forms DKNA, DKNB, and DKNC, each of 15 items selected from the parent set, had alpha coefficients above 0.82 and correlated 0.90 with each other. A full clinical trial, using DKNA, DKNB, and DKNC in randomized order of presentation, was conducted with 219 subjects attending a 2-day diabetes education program. Overall DKN scores improved from 7.6 (51%) to 11.3 (75%). Analysis of variance confirmed that DKNA, DKNB, and DKNC were equivalent forms at pretest. Mean posttest scores on DKNB were lower than the other scales (P less than 0.001), but variances were equivalent for all three. A specific local change in the education program format was found to account for this discrepancy in the DKNB posttest mean. In situations where comprehensive assessment of diabetes knowledge would be time-consuming and unnecessary, these results indicate that rapid and reliable assessment is possible with a scale of only 15 validated items. The development of parallel forms of the scale extends the range of retesting possibilities for diagnosis and research.