Does self monitoring of blood blucose as opposed to urinalysis provide additional benefit in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes receiving structured education? The DESMOND SMBG randomised controlled trial protocol

Background
The benefit of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people with type 2 diabetes on diet or oral agents other than sulphonylureas remains uncertain. Trials of interventions incorporating education about self-monitoring of blood glucose have reported mixed results. A recent systematic review concluded that SMBG was not cost-effective. However, what was unclear was whether a cheaper method of self-monitoring (such as urine glucose monitoring) could produce comparable benefit and patient acceptability for less cost.

Methods/Design
The DESMOND SMBG trial is comparing two monitoring strategies (blood glucose monitoring and urine testing) over 18 months when incorporated into a comprehensive self-management structured education programme. It is a multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial, conducted across 8 sites (7 primary care trusts) in England, UK involving individuals with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes.

The trial has 80% power to demonstrate equivalence in mean HbA1c (the primary end-point) at 18 months of within ± 0.5% assuming 20% drop out and 20% non-consent. Secondary end-points include blood pressure, lipids, body weight and psychosocial measures as well as a qualitative sub-study.

Practices were randomised to one of two arms: participants attend a DESMOND programme incorporating a module on self-monitoring of either urine or blood glucose. The programme is delivered by accredited educators who received specific training about equipoise. Biomedical data are collected and psychosocial scales completed at baseline, and 6, 12, and 18 months post programme. Qualitative research with participants and educators will explore views and experiences of the trial and preferences for methods of monitoring.

Discussion
The DESMOND SMBG trial is designed to provide evidence to inform the debate about the value of self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Strengths include a setting in primary care, a cluster design, a health economic analysis, a comparison of different methods of monitoring while controlling for other components of training within the context of a quality assured structured education programme and a qualitative sub-study.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose versus self-monitoring of urine glucose in adults with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes receiving structured education: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To compare the effectiveness and acceptability of self-monitoring of blood glucose with self-monitoring of urine glucose in adults with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site cluster randomized controlled trial with practice-level randomization. Participants attended a structured group education programme, which included a module on self-monitoring using blood glucose or urine glucose monitoring. HbA1c and other biomedical measures as well as psychosocial data were collected at 6, 12 and 18 months. A total of 292 participants with Type 2 diabetes were recruited from 75 practices. RESULTS: HbA1c levels were significantly lower at 18 months than at baseline in both the blood monitoring group [mean (se) -12 (2) mmol/mol; -1.1 (0.2) %] and the urine monitoring group [mean (se) -13 (2) mmol/mol; -1.2 (0.2)%], with no difference between groups [mean difference adjusted for cluster effect and baseline value = -1 mmol/mol (95% CI -3, 2); -0.1% (95% CI -0.3, 0.2)]. Similar improvements were observed for the other biomedical outcomes, with no differences between groups. Both groups showed improvements in total treatment satisfaction, generic well-being, and diabetes-specific well-being, and had a less threatening view of diabetes, with no differences between groups at 18 months. Approximately one in five participants in the urine monitoring arm switched to blood monitoring, while those in the blood monitoring arm rarely switched (18 vs 1% at 18 months; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes who attended structured education showed similar improvements in HbA1c levels at 18 months, regardless of whether they were assigned to blood or urine self-monitoring.

Explaining engagement in self-monitoring among participants of the DESMOND self-monitoring trial: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (DESMOND) Self-monitoring Trial reported that people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes attending community-based structured education and randomized to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or urine monitoring had comparable improvements in biomedical outcomes, but differences in satisfaction with, and continued use of monitoring method, well-being and perceived threat from diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences of SMBG and urine monitoring following structured education. We specifically addressed the perceived usefulness of each monitoring method and the associated well-being. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 18 adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes participating in the DESMOND Self-monitoring Trial (SMBG, N=10; urine monitoring, N=8)~12 months into the trial. Analysis was informed by the constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Interviewees reported SMBG as accurate, convenient and useful. Declining use was explained by having established a pattern of managing blood glucose with less frequent monitoring or lack of feedback or encouragement from health care professionals. Many initially positive views of urine monitoring progressively changed due to perceived inaccuracy, leading some to switch to SMBG. Perceiving diabetes as less serious was attributable to lack of symptoms, treatment with diet alone and-in the urine-monitoring group-consistently negative readings. Urine monitoring also provided less visible evidence of diabetes and of the effect of behaviour on glucose. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the importance for professionals of considering patients' preferences when using self-monitoring technologies, including how these change over time, when supporting the self-care behaviours of people with type 2 diabetes.