Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
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) are unclear. SMBG testing is a resource intensive activity without firmly established patient benefits. While SMBG holds great promise for sparking favorable behavior change, the potential for no benefit or even patient harm must be acknowledged. Possible negative effects on patient quality of life must be more closely examined along with the speculative benefits of SMBG in non-insulin treated T2DM. Among studies examining this issue a general consensus is evolving; while SMBG may or may not be useful, its value can only be fully appreciated when the SMBG results are provided to patients in a useful manner. The overarching goal of this proposal is to assess the impact of three different SMBG testing approaches on patient-centered outcomes in patients with non-insulin treated T2DM within the real-world, clinic setting. In this pragmatic trial, 450 patients will be randomized to one of the following three SMBG testing regimens: 1) no SMBG testing, 2) once daily SMBG testing with standard patient feedback consisting of glucose values being immediately reported to the patient through the glucose meter, and 3) once daily SMBG testing with enhanced patient feedback consisting of glucose values being immediately reported to the patient plus automated, tailored feedback messaging. The first two arms represent common SMBG testing approaches. The third arm is an enhanced, patient-centered approach to SMBG testing. SMBG values will be evaluated at routine clinic visits over 52 weeks.
Within the context of a controlled and randomized but pragmatic trial, we seek to answer the following question: does SMBG testing make sense for Non-insulin treated (NIT) diabetes mellitus (DM) patients in terms of either A1c values or Health-related Quality of Life (QOL). We will also examine whether or not patients with different baseline characteristics might see different outcomes from three SMBG testing approaches. To achieve our goal of testing SMBG options in community-based primary care practices, the study has been designed to minimize as much as possible any interruptions in or alterations to standard daily patient care. We will recruit 450 patients from five primary care practices. Patients will be followed for one year. During routine clinic visits, their health care providers will be guided to modify therapies based on American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines, which focus on A1c values and SMBG values if available.
Study Arms Two of the three study arms were chosen to reflect existing, widely used options for patients with NIT DM. Arm 3, described below, of this trial is particularly novel in that it tests the potential benefit of new technology now available to these patients; namely, wireless transmission of blood glucose test results accompanied by instantaneous tailored feedback. While this option may hold great promise for patients and their providers, data supporting this are lacking. The results of this study will inform consumers and providers about whether this new technology can support efforts to alter behaviors in a way that results in improved A1c values or better quality of life. Particularly appealing is that this approach employs technology that supports more efficient use of SMBG values by both patients and their providers. In terms of their pragmatic 'fit', all three groups fit easily into current practice at the participating practices. For example, they do not require extra clinic visits (other than possibly the initial recruitment assessment), and while staff will need to download glucose reports for patients in Arms 2 and 3, this will be a very simple, streamlined procedure. In terms of risks to patients, none of the three groups puts patients at any additional risk, because all three are versions of 'standard practice' for this patient population and doctors are free to alter therapies and testing schedules as they normally would.
Potential Alterations to the Testing Recommendations: Providers will be strongly encouraged to maintain SMBG testing fidelity based upon the treatment arm to which a patient is randomized; however, if a provider believes that testing should occur more frequently due to concern for serious unrecognized hypo- or hyperglycemia or for any other reason, testing recommendations may be modified. This approach provides for patient safety and preserves the pragmatic nature of the trial. Glucose testing strips will be provided to participants on a quarterly basis. If a provider deems that SMBG testing should occur more frequently than what is recommended to the patient based on the study arm to which he or she has been randomized, the health care provider must write the prescription for the additional test strips and the strips must be paid for out-of-pocket or through insurance. Following an intention to treat model, patients who opt not to follow the testing regimen to which they were randomly assigned will be encouraged to remain in the study. Any deviations from the assigned SMBG testing protocol will be readily known via the glucose meter reports.
Mixed methods approach. A mixed methods approach in which both qualitative and quantitative data are collected provides advantages when exploring complex research questions such as the ones posed in this proposal. The quantitative data will allow us to assess changes in objective measures, while the qualitative data will provide a deeper understanding of patients' and providers' experiences with the various components of SMBG testing arms (e.g., the meters, SMBG results, personalized messaging, downloadable reports, treatment algorithms, etc.) It is also the case that, while some patients are interested in seeing hard facts and figures, others prefer testimonials from patients like themselves. The mixed methods approach enables us to provide both types of information, increasing the effectiveness and uptake of our dissemination efforts.
Recruitment and randomization procedures. Patient Recruitment: All potentially eligible patients expressing interest in the study will complete an initial screening phone call. The call will take about 15 minutes, during which a member of the study team will describe the study, answer questions, and conduct a short set of simple screening to determine eligibility. Eligible patients who remain interested in participation will complete an assessment visit with a research coordinator. To decrease patient burden and further engage participating practices, assessment visits will occur at the patient's primary care office. Assessments will be separate from their appointment with their primary care provider, and may or may not occur on the same day as a regularly scheduled clinic visit, though for patient convenience we will make every effort to coordinate the assessments with a regular clinic visits. During these assessments, the research coordinator will review the study details in greater depth, verify all inclusion and exclusion criteria, and obtain written informed consent.
Patient Randomization: After providing informed consent, baseline A1c, and completing all baseline study questionnaires, participants will be randomized to one of the three arms using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. The research coordinator will review the treatment assignment with the patient, using a standardized script, provide the training and supplies necessary for participation in that study arm and answer any remaining questions.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| No testing | No Intervention | No testing | |
| standard messaging | Other | SMBG standard messaging |
|
| enhanced messaging | Other | SMBG enhanced messaging |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMBG | Behavioral | Blood glucose levels are tested once daily. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Absolute Change in % Hemoglobin A1c From Baseline at 52 Weeks | Absolute Change in Glycemic Control (% Hemoglobin A1c) from baseline at 52 weeks | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Mean Difference in Health-related Quality of Life Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in Short Form-36 (SF-36) subscale scores (Physical and Mental subscales) from baseline to 52 weeks. The SF-36 is a widely used measure of health-related quality of life. Each subscale score ranges from 0 - 100, with 100 being the best quality of life score. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Problem Areas in Diabetes Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | The change from baseline Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scores will be assessed at 52 weeks. The PAID is a widely used tool to assess psychological and social stress associated with diabetes. The PAID scores range from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating the most distress. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Katrina E Donahue, MD, MPH | University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill | Principal Investigator |
| Laura A Young, MD, PhD | University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | Chapel Hill | North Carolina | 27599 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18945920 | Background | Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, Ferrannini E, Holman RR, Sherwin R, Zinman B; American Diabetes Association; European Association for Study of Diabetes. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009 Jan;32(1):193-203. doi: 10.2337/dc08-9025. Epub 2008 Oct 22. | |
| 10388978 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| National diabetes information clearinghouse | View source |
Not provided
De-identified public use data files and documentation will allow researchers to have access to the final research data collected for this study. Care will be taken to remove indirect identifiers or other information that could result in the inadvertent disclosure of participants' identities due to the occurrence of unusual data elements. The public use database will be stored at the University of North Carolina's Sheps Center for Health Services Research. Researchers who would like access to the public-use data files for this study must enter into a data use agreement to ensure that the information will be used solely for statistical analysis or research reporting purposes. The project co-investigators in conjunction with the project manager will review requests for data and authorize provision of instructions and passwords needed to download the dataset. The public use data will be available after submission of the publication reporting the main trial findings.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Potential participants were identified via the electronic health record (EHR) and were called to determine if they met inclusion criteria that not available from the EHR: did not plan to move or get pregnant in the next year, did not see an endocrinologist for their diabetes care, and was a patient of record in one of the 15 participating clinics.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | No Testing | No SMBG testing |
| FG001 | SMBG Standard Messaging | Daily SMBG with standard messaging |
| FG002 | SMBG Enhanced Messaging | Daily SMBG with enhanced messaging |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | No Testing | No SMBG testing |
| BG001 | SMBG Standard Messaging | Daily SMBG with standard messaging |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Absolute Change in % Hemoglobin A1c From Baseline at 52 Weeks | Absolute Change in Glycemic Control (% Hemoglobin A1c) from baseline at 52 weeks | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to provide blood samples yet were able to complete all or part of the patient interview. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Percent Hemoglobin A1c | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
From Randomization date until Final Visit date: 52 weeks +-6 weeks
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | No Testing | No SMBG testing |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Death | Nervous system disorders | Other | Systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitalization | General disorders | Other | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr. Katrina Donahue | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | 919-966-5090 | Katrina_Donahue@med.unc.edu |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003920 | Diabetes Mellitus |
| D003924 | Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D044882 | Glucose Metabolism Disorders |
| D008659 | Metabolic Diseases |
| D009750 | Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases |
| D004700 | Endocrine System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D015190 | Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001774 | Blood Chemical Analysis |
| D019963 | Clinical Chemistry Tests |
| D019411 | Clinical Laboratory Techniques |
| D019937 | Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The investigators including the bio-statistician were blind to the study assignment.
| Change in Diabetes Symptom Checklist- Revised (DSC-R) Overall Score From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in diabetes-related symptom frequency and perceived severity from baseline at 52 weeks using the Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised. Overall score ranges from 0 to 170, with 170 indicating the worse symptom severity. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Change in Summary of Diabetes Self Care Activities (SDCA) Subscales From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in the SDCA subscales (general diet, specific diet, exercise, blood sugar testing, and foot care), a multidimensional measure of diabetes self-management activities, from baseline at 52 weeks will be assessed. For each subscale, the score is the mean number of days specified subscale activities occurred. Each subscale ranges from 0 to 7, with 7 the best score possible. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Change in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Subscale Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change from baseline patient satisfaction with treatment at 52 weeks using the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire subscales, overall satisfaction and satisfaction with blood glucose control. For overall satisfaction, the range is 0-36, with 36 (high score) being the most satisfied. For satisfaction with blood glucose control, the subscale range is 0 to 12, with 0 (low score) indicating the most satisfaction. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Change Diabetes Empowerment Scale - Short Form (DES-SF) From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Changes in diabetes-specific self-efficacy using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale - Short Form from baseline at 52 weeks. The scale ranges from 1 to 5, with 5 indicating most empowered. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Change in Patient-Provider Communication From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change from baseline patient perception of communication with their provider at 52 weeks using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT). Scale scores range from 1 to 5, with 5 being the best communication. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Hypoglycemia Frequency | Number of participants with hypoglycemia events for the 52 week intervention period. | Baseline to 52 weeks |
| Baseline Health Care Utilization and at 52 Weeks | Primary care visits, hospitalization, urgent care, and emergency room and emergency medical service (EMS) visits recorded at baseline and 52 weeks. | Baseline and 52 weeks |
| Number of Participants on Specified Diabetes Medications at Baseline and Follow-up | Number of participants taking each of the following medications at baseline and follow-up: metformin, sulfonylurea, glinides, Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), Thiazolidinediones (TZD), and dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-IV). | Baseline and 52 weeks |
| Background |
| Quality of life in type 2 diabetic patients is affected by complications but not by intensive policies to improve blood glucose or blood pressure control (UKPDS 37). U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Diabetes Care. 1999 Jul;22(7):1125-36. doi: 10.2337/diacare.22.7.1125. |
| 20194231 | Background | Vijan S. In the clinic. Type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Mar 2;152(5):ITC31-15; quiz ITC316. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-5-201003020-01003. |
| 24357209 | Background | American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes--2014. Diabetes Care. 2014 Jan;37 Suppl 1:S14-80. doi: 10.2337/dc14-S014. No abstract available. |
| 18611098 | Background | Towfigh A, Romanova M, Weinreb JE, Munjas B, Suttorp MJ, Zhou A, Shekelle PG. Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus not taking insulin: a meta-analysis. Am J Manag Care. 2008 Jul;14(7):468-75. |
| 19827909 | Background | Allemann S, Houriet C, Diem P, Stettler C. Self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009 Dec;25(12):2903-13. doi: 10.1185/03007990903364665. |
| 22371867 | Background | Farmer AJ, Perera R, Ward A, Heneghan C, Oke J, Barnett AH, Davidson MB, Guerci B, Coates V, Schwedes U, O'Malley S. Meta-analysis of individual patient data in randomised trials of self monitoring of blood glucose in people with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes. BMJ. 2012 Feb 27;344:e486. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e486. |
| 30377539 | Derived | Kowitt SD, Donahue KE, Fisher EB, Mitchell M, Young LA. How is neighborhood social disorganization associated with diabetes outcomes? A multilevel investigation of glycemic control and self-reported use of acute or emergency health care services. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018 Oct 19;4:19. doi: 10.1186/s40842-018-0069-0. eCollection 2018. |
| 28600913 | Derived | Young LA, Buse JB, Weaver MA, Vu MB, Mitchell CM, Blakeney T, Grimm K, Rees J, Niblock F, Donahue KE; Monitor Trial Group. Glucose Self-monitoring in Non-Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care Settings: A Randomized Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jul 1;177(7):920-929. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1233. |
| 28545493 | Derived | Young LA, Buse JB, Weaver MA, Vu MB, Reese A, Mitchell CM, Blakeney T, Grimm K, Rees J, Donahue KE. Three approaches to glucose monitoring in non-insulin treated diabetes: a pragmatic randomized clinical trial protocol. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 May 25;17(1):369. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2202-7. |
| Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Diabetes Report Card | View source |
| BG002 |
| SMBG Enhanced Messaging |
Daily SMBG with enhanced messaging |
| BG003 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| OG002 | SMBG Enhanced Messaging | Daily SMBG with enhanced messaging |
|
|
| Primary | Mean Difference in Health-related Quality of Life Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in Short Form-36 (SF-36) subscale scores (Physical and Mental subscales) from baseline to 52 weeks. The SF-36 is a widely used measure of health-related quality of life. Each subscale score ranges from 0 - 100, with 100 being the best quality of life score. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete the SF-36, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Problem Areas in Diabetes Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | The change from baseline Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scores will be assessed at 52 weeks. The PAID is a widely used tool to assess psychological and social stress associated with diabetes. The PAID scores range from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating the most distress. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Diabetes Symptom Checklist- Revised (DSC-R) Overall Score From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in diabetes-related symptom frequency and perceived severity from baseline at 52 weeks using the Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised. Overall score ranges from 0 to 170, with 170 indicating the worse symptom severity. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Summary of Diabetes Self Care Activities (SDCA) Subscales From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change in the SDCA subscales (general diet, specific diet, exercise, blood sugar testing, and foot care), a multidimensional measure of diabetes self-management activities, from baseline at 52 weeks will be assessed. For each subscale, the score is the mean number of days specified subscale activities occurred. Each subscale ranges from 0 to 7, with 7 the best score possible. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Subscale Scores From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change from baseline patient satisfaction with treatment at 52 weeks using the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire subscales, overall satisfaction and satisfaction with blood glucose control. For overall satisfaction, the range is 0-36, with 36 (high score) being the most satisfied. For satisfaction with blood glucose control, the subscale range is 0 to 12, with 0 (low score) indicating the most satisfaction. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change Diabetes Empowerment Scale - Short Form (DES-SF) From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Changes in diabetes-specific self-efficacy using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale - Short Form from baseline at 52 weeks. The scale ranges from 1 to 5, with 5 indicating most empowered. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Patient-Provider Communication From Baseline to 52 Weeks | Change from baseline patient perception of communication with their provider at 52 weeks using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT). Scale scores range from 1 to 5, with 5 being the best communication. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to complete this scale, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Hypoglycemia Frequency | Number of participants with hypoglycemia events for the 52 week intervention period. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able to provide information for this measure, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Baseline to 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Baseline Health Care Utilization and at 52 Weeks | Primary care visits, hospitalization, urgent care, and emergency room and emergency medical service (EMS) visits recorded at baseline and 52 weeks. | Differences in overall numbers by arm from the completed flow totals are due to the fact that not all participants were able provide this information, yet did provide blood samples for A1c testing and vice versa. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | number of events | Baseline and 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants on Specified Diabetes Medications at Baseline and Follow-up | Number of participants taking each of the following medications at baseline and follow-up: metformin, sulfonylurea, glinides, Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), Thiazolidinediones (TZD), and dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-IV). | Medication regimens vary among patients. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Baseline and 52 weeks |
|
|
|
| 2 |
| 152 |
| 6 |
| 152 |
| EG001 | SMBG Standard Messaging | Daily SMBG with standard messaging | 0 | 150 | 9 | 150 |
| EG002 | SMBG Enhanced Messaging | Daily SMBG with enhanced messaging | 1 | 148 | 10 | 148 |
| Death | Cardiac disorders | Other | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Severe Hypoglycemia | Renal and urinary disorders | Other | Systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| D003933 | Diagnosis |
| D003940 | Diagnostic Techniques, Endocrine |
| D008991 | Monitoring, Physiologic |
| D000085263 | Self-Testing |
| D012648 | Self Care |
| D013812 | Therapeutics |
| D008919 | Investigative Techniques |
|
|
| Exercise |
|
| Blood sugar testing |
|
| Foot care |
|
|
|
| Urgent Care visits - baseline |
|
| Urgent Care visits - follow-up |
|
| Emergency room visits - baseline |
|
| Emergency room visits - follow-up |
|
| Overnight hospitalization - baseline |
|
| Overnight hospitalization - follow-up |
|
| EMS called - baseline |
|
| EMS called - follow-up |
|
| Metformin - follow-up |
|
|
| Sulfonylurea - baseline |
|
|
| Sulfonylurea - follow-up |
|
|
| Glinides - baseline |
|
|
| Glinides - follow-up |
|
|
| GLP-1 - baseline |
|
|
| GLP-1 - follow-up |
|
|
| TZD - baseline |
|
|
| TZD - follow-up |
|
|
| DPP-IV - baseline |
|
|
| DPP-IV - follow-up |
|
|