Health Literacy, Glycemic Control, and Physician-Advised Glucose Self-Monitoring Use in Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between health literacy and both patient-reported and clinical outcomes in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n = 448) from 15 primary care practices. The association between health literacy and patient-reported and clinical outcomes, including numeracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) use, how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing, and glycemic control (as measured by A1C), was investigated. RESULTS: Study participants included 448 patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes located within central North Carolina. Participants with limited health literacy had poorer glycemic control (A1C 7.7 ± 1.1% vs. 7.5 ± 1.0%, P = 0.016) despite using SMBG testing more frequently (daily SMBG testing 49.3 vs. 30.7%, P = 0.001) compared to individuals with adequate health literacy. The difference in how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing between limited and adequate health literacy groups was not significant (P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Limited health literacy was associated with poorer glycemic control and an increased frequency of SMBG testing in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. There was no significant difference in how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing between patients with limited and adequate health literacy.

Glucose Self-monitoring in Non-Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care Settings: A Randomized Trial.

Importance: The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) levels in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes has been debated. Objective: To compare 3 approaches of SMBG for effects on hemoglobin A1c levels and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among people with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes in primary care practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Monitor Trial study was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial conducted in 15 primary care practices in central North Carolina. Participants were randomized between January 2014 and July 2015. Eligible patients with type 2 non-insulin-treated diabetes were: older than 30 years, established with a primary care physician at a participating practice, had glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c) levels higher than 6.5% but lower than 9.5% within the 6 months preceding screening, as obtained from the electronic medical record, and willing to comply with the results of random assignment into a study group. Of the 1032 assessed for eligibility, 450 were randomized. Interventions: No SMBG, once-daily SMBG, and once-daily SMBG with enhanced patient feedback including automatic tailored messages delivered via the meter. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes included hemoglobin A1c levels and HRQOL at 52 weeks. Results: A total of 450 patients were randomized and 418 (92.9%) completed the final visit. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c levels across all 3 groups (P = .74; estimated adjusted mean hemoglobin A1c difference, SMBG with messaging vs no SMBG, -0.09%; 95% CI, -0.31% to 0.14%; SMBG vs no SMBG, -0.05%; 95% CI, -0.27% to 0.17%). There were also no significant differences found in HRQOL. There were no notable differences in key adverse events including hypoglycemia frequency, health care utilization, or insulin initiation. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, we observed no clinically or statistically significant differences at 1 year in glycemic control or HRQOL between patients who performed SMBG compared with those who did not perform SMBG. The addition of this type of tailored feedback provided through messaging via a meter did not provide any advantage in glycemic control. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02033499.

Three approaches to glucose monitoring in non-insulin treated diabetes: a pragmatic randomized clinical trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: For the nearly 75% of patients living with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) that do not use insulin, decisions regarding self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) can be especially problematic. While in theory SMBG holds great promise for sparking favorable behavior change, it is a resource intensive activity without firmly established patient benefits. This study describes our study protocol to assess the impact of three different SMBG testing approaches on patient-centered outcomes in patients with non-insulin treated T2DM within a community-based, clinic setting. METHODS/DESIGN: Using stakeholder engagement approach, we developed and implemented a pragmatic trial of patient with non-insulin treated T2DM patients from five primary care practices randomized to one of three SMBG regimens: 1) no testing; 2) once daily testing with standard feedback consisting of glucose values being immediately reported to the patient through the glucose meter; and 3) once daily testing with enhanced patient feedback consisting of glucose values being immediately reported to the patient PLUS automated, tailored feedback messaging delivered to the patient through the glucose meter following each testing. Main outcomes assessed at 52 weeks include quality of life and glycemic control. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic trial seeks to better understand the value of SMBG in non-insulin treated patients with T2DM. This paper outlines the protocol used to implement this study in fifteen community-based primary care practices and highlights the impact of stakeholder involvement from the earliest stages of project conception and implementation. Plans for stakeholder involvement for result dissemination are also discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02033499 , January 9, 2014.