Glycaemic rises after waking up in response to an alarm clock in type 1-diabetic patients analysed with continuous glucose monitoring (GlucoDay® S).

AIMS: Waking up in response to an alarm-clock may evoke a stress reaction that leads to rising glucose concentrations. METHOD: 30 type 1-diabetic patients participated in 3 overnight conditions: (a) with an alarm-clock set at 2 h intervals for glucose self monitoring, (b) with a nurse performing blood glucose determinations, and (c) with the patients left undisturbed. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed with a GlucoDay® S device. RESULTS: After waking up in response to an alarm-clock, CGM-determined glucose concentrations rose by 18±6 mg/dl at 4 a.m. (p=0.0003), whereas negligible increments were seen with nurse assistance (e. g., 0±4 mg/dl at 4 a.m.). CONCLUSIONS: Waking up in response to an alarm-clock leads to an arousal reaction that causes significant elevations in glucose concentrations. Continuous glucose monitoring is a suitable method to detect such short-lived increments in glucose concentrations. But at the moment the CGMS is not able to substitute for inpatient glucose profiles.

Short-term effects on patient satisfaction of continuous glucose monitoring with the GlucoDay with real-time and retrospective access to glucose values: a crossover study.

BACKGROUND: This randomized crossover trial examines the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with real-time access (RTA) to glucose data versus CGM with a retrospective analysis (RA) of glucose data regarding satisfaction with CGM and other patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Participants used the CGM device (GlucoDay, Menarini Diagnostics, Florence, Italy) twice. In one study phase, patients were allowed RTA to, and in the other phase RA of, current glucose values. The order of these two conditions was randomized. At baseline and after the first and second trials, subjects completed questionnaires (Continuous Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Scale) about perceived satisfaction with CGM. They also completed the Problem Areas in Diabetes Questionnaire, a state anxiety scale (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and a depression scale (Center of Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale). RESULTS: Fifty patients with type 1 diabetes (41.7 +/- 12.3 years old, diabetes duration of 14.75 +/- 11.9 years, 48% female, hemoglobin A1c 8.1 +/- 1.5%, years of education 10.3 +/- 2.1 years) participated in this study. At baseline patients perceived CGM as rather advantageous, but after RA and RTA the perceived benefits were reduced (baseline, 101.0 +/- 16.0; RA, 95.7 +/- 20.2; RTA, 93.6 +/- 22.8; P < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference between RA and RTA. Also, there was no significant effect on diabetes-related distress or state anxiety, but a positive effect on depression scores. CONCLUSIONS: There was no specific, significant, negative or positive effect of RA versus RTA on satisfaction with CGM. Exposing patients with type 1 diabetes to their current glucose values does not seem to have a specific negative impact on the appraisal of CGM or more generic patient-reported outcomes.