Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2011
Comparable efficacy of self-monitoring of quantitative urine glucose with self-monitoring of blood glucose on glycaemic control in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lu J, Bu R F, Sun Z L, Lu Q S, Jin H, Wang Y, Wang S H, Li L, Xie Z L, Yang B Q
Аннотация
AIM: To assess whether self-monitoring of quantitative urine glucose or blood glucose is effective, convenient and safe for glycaemic control in non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: Adults with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes were recruited and randomized into three groups: Group A, self-monitoring with a quantitative urine glucose meter (n = 38); Group B, self monitoring with a blood glucose meter (n=35); Group C, the control group without self monitoring (n=35). All patients were followed up for six months, during which identical diabetes care was provided.
RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in HbA1c within each group (p < 0.05). At the study conclusion, mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were -1.9% for Group A, -1.5% for Group B and -1.0% for Group C, and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c ≤ 6.5% were 38.9%, 35.3% and 20.0% respectively. However, no significant differences between the groups were found. The average monitoring frequency was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B. The incidence of hypoglycaemia and quality of life scores were similar between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that self-monitoring of urine glucose has comparable efficacy on glycaemic control, and facilitates better compliance than blood self monitoring, without influencing the quality of life or risk of hypoglycaemia.
METHODS: Adults with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes were recruited and randomized into three groups: Group A, self-monitoring with a quantitative urine glucose meter (n = 38); Group B, self monitoring with a blood glucose meter (n=35); Group C, the control group without self monitoring (n=35). All patients were followed up for six months, during which identical diabetes care was provided.
RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in HbA1c within each group (p < 0.05). At the study conclusion, mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were -1.9% for Group A, -1.5% for Group B and -1.0% for Group C, and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c ≤ 6.5% were 38.9%, 35.3% and 20.0% respectively. However, no significant differences between the groups were found. The average monitoring frequency was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B. The incidence of hypoglycaemia and quality of life scores were similar between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that self-monitoring of urine glucose has comparable efficacy on glycaemic control, and facilitates better compliance than blood self monitoring, without influencing the quality of life or risk of hypoglycaemia.