Unit of Pathology& Microbiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of the West Indies.
Chin Med J (Engl). 2011 Jan;124(2):166-71.
The debate over the overall benefits of self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes patients is still continuing. We aimed to assess the difference in glycaemic control and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk levels of experimental type 2 diabetes patients provided with facilities for self-monitoring blood glucose and their counterparts without such facilities.
Sixty-one patients who had no prior experience in using glucometers were studied as intervention (n = 30) and control (n = 31) groups. The intervention group was trained in self-monitoring of blood glucose and documentation. Baseline blood glucose and fasting blood glucose were measured and the intervention patients were provided with glucometers and advised to self-monitor their fasting and postprandial blood glucose over six months. The 10-year CHD risk levels were determined with the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study-derived risk engine calculator.
The age and diabetes duration were similar in the two groups (P > 0.05). The majority of the patients were unemployed or retired females with only a primary level education. After 3 months, the haemogolbin A 1C (HbA 1c) levels of the control patients remained unchanged ((7.8 ± 0.3)% vs. (7.9 ± 0.4)%, P > 0.05) whereas the HbA 1c levels of the intervention patients were significantly reduced from the baseline at three ((9.6 ± 0.3)% vs. (7.8 ± 0.3)%, P < 0.001) and six ((9.2 ± 0.4)% vs. (7.5 ± 0.3)%, P < 0.001) months. Interestingly, while the 10-year CHD risk level of the control group remained unchanged after three months, that of the intervention group was remarkably reduced at three and six months from the baseline level ((7.4 ± 1.3)% vs. (4.5 ± 0.9)%, P = 0.056).
Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes patients significantly improved glycaemic control and the CHD risk profile, suggesting that type 2 diabetes patients will potentially benefit from inclusion of glucose meters and testing strips in their health-care package.
关于 2 型糖尿病患者自我监测血糖的整体益处仍存在争议。我们旨在评估为 2 型糖尿病患者提供自我监测血糖设施与不提供此类设施的对照患者之间血糖控制和冠心病（CHD）风险水平的差异。
61 名无血糖仪使用经验的患者被分为干预组（n = 30）和对照组（n = 31）。干预组接受自我监测血糖和记录的培训。测量基线和空腹血糖，并为干预患者提供血糖仪，并建议他们在六个月内自我监测空腹和餐后血糖。使用英国前瞻性糖尿病研究衍生的风险引擎计算器确定 10 年 CHD 风险水平。
两组的年龄和糖尿病病程相似（P > 0.05）。大多数患者是失业或退休的女性，仅接受过小学教育。3 个月后，对照组患者的糖化血红蛋白 A1c（HbA1c）水平保持不变（（7.8 ± 0.3）%对（7.9 ± 0.4）%，P > 0.05），而干预组患者的 HbA1c 水平从基线显著降低在三个月（（9.6 ± 0.3）%对（7.8 ± 0.3）%，P < 0.001）和六个月（（9.2 ± 0.4）%对（7.5 ± 0.3）%，P < 0.001）。有趣的是，虽然对照组的 10 年 CHD 风险水平在三个月后保持不变，但干预组在三个月和六个月时从基线水平显著降低（（7.4 ± 1.3）%对（4.5 ± 0.9）%，P = 0.056）。
2 型糖尿病患者自我监测血糖显著改善了血糖控制和 CHD 风险状况，表明 2 型糖尿病患者将从其医疗保健套餐中纳入血糖仪和测试条中受益。
