Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Teló, Gabriela Heiden
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Souza, Martina Schaan de, Andrade, Thaís Stürmer, Schaan, Beatriz D'Agord
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10183/150415
Resumo: Background: Adherence to treatment has been defined as the degree to which a patient’s behavior corresponds to medical or health advice; however, the most appropriate method to evaluate adherence to diabetes care has yet to be identified. We conducted analyses to compare adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures with regard to their ability to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods: We analyzed four instruments to evaluate adherence: Self-Care Inventory-Revised, a self-administered survey; Diabetes Self-Monitoring Profile (DSMP), administered by trained researchers; a categorical (yes/no/sometimes) adherence self-evaluation; and a continuous (0–100) adherence self-evaluation. Blood glucose monitoring frequency was evaluated by self-report, diary, and meter download. Results: Participants (n = 82) were aged 39.0 ± 13.1 years with a mean diabetes duration of 21.2 ± 11.1 years; 27 % monitored blood glucose >4 times/day. The DSMP score was the strongest predictor of glycemic control (r = −0.32, P = 0.004) among adherence assessments, while blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download was the strongest predictor among blood glucose monitoring measures (r = −40, P < 0.001). All the self-report assessments had a significant but weak correlation with glycemic control (r ≤ 0.28, P ≤ 0.02). The final adjusted model identified the assessment of blood glucose monitoring frequency by meter download as the most robust predictor of HbA1c (estimate effect size = −0.58, P = 0.003). Conclusions: In efforts to evaluate adherence, blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download has the strongest relationship with glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes.
id UFRGS-2_14793e2f1681a83415a4c25e2133a2b4
oai_identifier_str oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/150415
network_acronym_str UFRGS-2
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
repository_id_str
spelling Teló, Gabriela HeidenSouza, Martina Schaan deAndrade, Thaís StürmerSchaan, Beatriz D'Agord2017-01-04T02:26:54Z20161758-5996http://hdl.handle.net/10183/150415001008486Background: Adherence to treatment has been defined as the degree to which a patient’s behavior corresponds to medical or health advice; however, the most appropriate method to evaluate adherence to diabetes care has yet to be identified. We conducted analyses to compare adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures with regard to their ability to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods: We analyzed four instruments to evaluate adherence: Self-Care Inventory-Revised, a self-administered survey; Diabetes Self-Monitoring Profile (DSMP), administered by trained researchers; a categorical (yes/no/sometimes) adherence self-evaluation; and a continuous (0–100) adherence self-evaluation. Blood glucose monitoring frequency was evaluated by self-report, diary, and meter download. Results: Participants (n = 82) were aged 39.0 ± 13.1 years with a mean diabetes duration of 21.2 ± 11.1 years; 27 % monitored blood glucose >4 times/day. The DSMP score was the strongest predictor of glycemic control (r = −0.32, P = 0.004) among adherence assessments, while blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download was the strongest predictor among blood glucose monitoring measures (r = −40, P < 0.001). All the self-report assessments had a significant but weak correlation with glycemic control (r ≤ 0.28, P ≤ 0.02). The final adjusted model identified the assessment of blood glucose monitoring frequency by meter download as the most robust predictor of HbA1c (estimate effect size = −0.58, P = 0.003). Conclusions: In efforts to evaluate adherence, blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download has the strongest relationship with glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes.application/pdfengDiabetology & metabolic syndrome [recurso eletrônico]. London. Vol. 8 (Jul. 2016), 54, [6] f.Diabetes mellitus tipo 1Adesão à medicaçãoAutomonitorização da glicemiaDiabetes mellitusType 1Medication adherenceBlood glucose monitoringComparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional studyEstrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSORIGINAL001008486.pdf001008486.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf1134859http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/1/001008486.pdf244361145f13ed55a5a554918cf2fcc0MD51TEXT001008486.pdf.txt001008486.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain29572http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/2/001008486.pdf.txt5215a910854d72c3c3f694f0527d2c0aMD52THUMBNAIL001008486.pdf.jpg001008486.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg2003http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/3/001008486.pdf.jpg7b5ea350b1610aaa0dadd557728252bdMD5310183/1504152023-05-17 03:30:35.120636oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/150415Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2023-05-17T06:30:35Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
title Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
spellingShingle Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
Teló, Gabriela Heiden
Diabetes mellitus tipo 1
Adesão à medicação
Automonitorização da glicemia
Diabetes mellitus
Type 1
Medication adherence
Blood glucose monitoring
title_short Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
title_full Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
title_sort Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes : a cross-sectional study
author Teló, Gabriela Heiden
author_facet Teló, Gabriela Heiden
Souza, Martina Schaan de
Andrade, Thaís Stürmer
Schaan, Beatriz D'Agord
author_role author
author2 Souza, Martina Schaan de
Andrade, Thaís Stürmer
Schaan, Beatriz D'Agord
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Teló, Gabriela Heiden
Souza, Martina Schaan de
Andrade, Thaís Stürmer
Schaan, Beatriz D'Agord
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Diabetes mellitus tipo 1
Adesão à medicação
Automonitorização da glicemia
topic Diabetes mellitus tipo 1
Adesão à medicação
Automonitorização da glicemia
Diabetes mellitus
Type 1
Medication adherence
Blood glucose monitoring
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv Diabetes mellitus
Type 1
Medication adherence
Blood glucose monitoring
description Background: Adherence to treatment has been defined as the degree to which a patient’s behavior corresponds to medical or health advice; however, the most appropriate method to evaluate adherence to diabetes care has yet to be identified. We conducted analyses to compare adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures with regard to their ability to predict glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods: We analyzed four instruments to evaluate adherence: Self-Care Inventory-Revised, a self-administered survey; Diabetes Self-Monitoring Profile (DSMP), administered by trained researchers; a categorical (yes/no/sometimes) adherence self-evaluation; and a continuous (0–100) adherence self-evaluation. Blood glucose monitoring frequency was evaluated by self-report, diary, and meter download. Results: Participants (n = 82) were aged 39.0 ± 13.1 years with a mean diabetes duration of 21.2 ± 11.1 years; 27 % monitored blood glucose >4 times/day. The DSMP score was the strongest predictor of glycemic control (r = −0.32, P = 0.004) among adherence assessments, while blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download was the strongest predictor among blood glucose monitoring measures (r = −40, P < 0.001). All the self-report assessments had a significant but weak correlation with glycemic control (r ≤ 0.28, P ≤ 0.02). The final adjusted model identified the assessment of blood glucose monitoring frequency by meter download as the most robust predictor of HbA1c (estimate effect size = −0.58, P = 0.003). Conclusions: In efforts to evaluate adherence, blood glucose monitoring frequency assessed by meter download has the strongest relationship with glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2016
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2017-01-04T02:26:54Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv Estrangeiro
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10183/150415
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 1758-5996
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 001008486
identifier_str_mv 1758-5996
001008486
url http://hdl.handle.net/10183/150415
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Diabetology & metabolic syndrome [recurso eletrônico]. London. Vol. 8 (Jul. 2016), 54, [6] f.
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron:UFRGS
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron_str UFRGS
institution UFRGS
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
collection Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/1/001008486.pdf
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/2/001008486.pdf.txt
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/150415/3/001008486.pdf.jpg
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 244361145f13ed55a5a554918cf2fcc0
5215a910854d72c3c3f694f0527d2c0a
7b5ea350b1610aaa0dadd557728252bd
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1801224912556261376