Cited by 51Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

Frequency of self-monitoring blood glucose and attainment of HbA1c target values

Open access
Elgart, Jorge F., González, Lorena, Prestes, Mariana, Rucci, Enzo, Gagliardino, Juan J.·2016·Acta Diabetologica

Abstract

Aims Test strips for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) represent in Argentina, around 50 % of diabetes treatment cost; the frequency of their use is closely associated with hyperglycemia treatment. However, the favorable impact of SMBG on attainment of HbA1c goal in different treatment conditions remains controversial. We therefore attempted to estimate the relationship between use of SMBG test strips and degree of attainment of metabolic control in an institution of our social security subsector (SSS) in which provision is fully covered and submitted to a regular audit system. Methods Observational retrospective study using information of 657 patients with T2DM (period 2009-2010) from the database of the Diabetes and Other Cardiovascular Risk Factors Program (DICARO) of one institution of our SSS. DICARO provides-with an audit system-100 % coverage for all drugs and keeps records of clinical, metabolic and treatment data from every patient. Results The average monthly test strips/patient used for SMBG increased as a function of treatment intensification: Monotherapy with oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) Conclusions In our population, the type of hyperglycemia treatment was the main driver of test strip use for SMBG; in every condition tested, targeted HbA1c values were associated with greater strip use. Patient education and prescription audit may optimize its use and treatment outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00592-015-0745-9

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 36 · Cited by 51

Authors
Elgart, J. F., González, L., Prestes, M., Rucci, E., & Gagliardino, J. J.
Affiliations
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
Corresponding author
Gagliardino, Juan J.
Venue
Acta Diabetologica
Published
2015-04-05
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
57-62
ISSN
  • 0940-5429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-5233
OpenAlex
W2084204099
Cited by
51
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4
FWCI
7.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Diabetologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • CONICET Digital (CONICET) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
self-monitoring of blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, oral antidiabetic drugs, insulin therapy, treatment intensification, prescription drug costs, prescription review, patient education, social security health system
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Glucose, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Care Planning, Retrospective Studies, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Databases, Factual, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review