4.7 Article

The Diabeo Software Enabling Individualized Insulin Dose Adjustments Combined With Telemedicine Support Improves HbA1c in Poorly Controlled Type 1 Diabetic Patients A 6-month, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter trial (TeleDiab 1 Study)

Journal

DIABETES CARE
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 533-539

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc10-1259

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. sanofi-aventis (Bridgewater, NJ)
  2. CERITD
  3. sanofi-aventis
  4. Orange

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To demonstrate that Diabeo software enabling individualized insulin dose adjustments combined with telemedicine support significantly improves HbA(1c) in poorly controlled type 1 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In a six-month open-label parallel-group, multicenter study, adult patients (n = 180) with type 1. diabetes (> 1 year), on a basal-bolus insulin regimen (> 6 months), with HbA(1c) >= 8%, were randomized to usual quarterly follow-up (G1), home use of a smartphone recommending insulin doses with quarterly visits (G2), or use of the smartphone with short teleconsultations every 2 weeks but no visit until point end (G3). RESULTS Six-month mean HbA(1c) in G3 (8.41 +/- 1.04%) was lower than in G1 (9.10 +/- 1.16%; P = 0.0019). G2 displayed intermediate results (8.63 +/- 1.07%). The Diabeo system gave a 0.91% (0.60; 1.21) improvement in HbA(1c) over controls and a 0.67% (0.35; 0.99) reduction when used without teleconsultation. There was no difference in the frequency of hypoglycemic episodes or in medical time spent for hospital or telephone consultations. However, patients in G1 and G2 spent nearly 5 h more than G3 patients attending hospital visits. CONCLUSIONS The Diabeo system gives a substantial improvement to metabolic control in chronic, poorly controlled type 1 diabetic patients without requiring more medical time and at a lower overall cost for the patient than usual care. Diabetes Care 34:533-539, 2011

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available