Patient Perceptions of Different Lancing Sites for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose: A Comparison of Fingertip Site with Palm Site Using the OneTouch® Ultra® Blood Glucose Monitoring System

Itō, Takao; Kamoi, Kyuzi; Minagawa, Shinichi; Kimura, Koichiro; Kobayashi, Atsuki

doi:10.1177/193229681000400420

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The OneTouch Ultra by Lifescan (Johnson & Johnson) in 2001, requiring only 1 µL of sample, used glucose oxidase methodology and was one of the first glucometers to be plasma calibrated 53. The OneTouch Ultra introduced the ability to test in other sites of the body like the forearm or hand, which reduced sampling pain and increased compliance.…”

Section: Poc Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical perspectives in clinical pathology: a history of glucose measurement

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the second in the series of historical articles dealing with developments in clinical pathology. As one of the most commonly measured analytes in pathology, the assessment of glucose dates back to the time of the ancient Egyptians. It was only in the 19th century that advances in chemistry led to the identification of the sugar in urine being glucose. The following century witnessed the development of more chemical and enzymatic methods which became incorporated into the modern analysers and point-of-care instruments which are as ubiquitous as the modern day cellphones. Tracking the milestones in these developments shows the striking paradigms and the many parallels in the development of other clinical chemistry methods.

show abstract

Section: Poc Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical perspectives in clinical pathology: a history of glucose measurement

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…88 Problem solving techniques 15 and motivational interviewing are useful strategies to increase adherence with SMBG. 89 Minimizing pain with alternative lancing devices, 90 alternative site testing, 91,92 or flash glucose monitoring systems, 93 may encourage testing. Encouraging patients to view results as "high" rather than "bad" increases testing frequency and improves HbA1c in adults and young people.…”

Section: Addressing Barriers To Technology Use and Strategies To Optimentioning

confidence: 99%

Influences on Technology Use and Efficacy in Type 1 Diabetes

Franklin

2016

J Diabetes Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1921 technology has existed to replace insulin and treat diabetes. Although a definitive link was established between HbA1c and complication risk over 20 years ago, 1 only a minority achieve HbA1c targets despite intensified insulin regimens and new technologies. 2 This narrative review focuses on how psychosocial functioning affects uptake and use of technologies and the impact of technology on psychosocial outcomes in adults and children with type 1 diabetes and their caregivers. It examines evidence from large meta-analyses to small qualitative studies which provide detailed insight into technology use. Self Monitoring of Blood GlucoseFrequent blood glucose testing should be a routine part of diabetes self-care 3,4 as it is integral to intensive insulin therapy 1 and improves glycemic control. 5 However, studies of adult patients reveal low testing frequency, 6,7 which is influenced by psychosocial factors, with increased testing in patients of older age, female gender, longer diabetes duration, on basal bolus therapy compared with less intensive regimens, with decreased hypoglycemic awareness, higher "fear of hypoglycemia" and positive self-care personality traits 6 and less testing in ethnic minorities, smokers, those with low education, 8 low income and language barriers. 7 In adolescents, testing is more frequent in younger age groups, higher social status, and higher self-efficacy and less frequent in those with lower self-esteem, high-stress life events, lower parental support, 9,10 from single parent, lower-income, and ethnic minorities, and when given self-care autonomy before reaching cognitive and social maturity.11 In children, family functioning 12 and parental education 13 predict adherence to diabetes self-management and glycemic control.Qualitative studies in adults show that some perceive selfmonitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) as a tool to achieve good control and a normal life, but others see SMBG as a 639315D STXXX10.1177/1932296816639315Journal of Diabetes Science and TechnologyFranklin AbstractThe majority of people with type 1 diabetes have suboptimal glycemic control, increasing their complication risk. Technology to support diabetes self-care has advanced significantly and includes self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), insulin pump therapy (IPT), continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT), which are stepping stones toward the "artificial pancreas" using closed-loop technology. Use of these technologies improves clinical outcomes for patients with the appropriate skills and motivation. This review addresses the psychosocial factors that influence both technology provision and clinical outcome and also how technology impacts on psychological outcomes. Optimal use of the various diabetes self-management technologies is influenced by previous self-care behaviors, demographic and psychological factors. Provision of IPT is also influenced by the same factors. Despite technology increasing the complexity of treatment, the lack of evidence for adverse...

show abstract

“…, Ito et al . ). Several studies have reported that blood glucose measurements taken at the forearm and thigh were less reliable in the presence of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia, after a meal and after exercise because the blood glucose concentration at these sites lagged behind that at the fingertip by 30–60 minutes (Ellison et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The major concern about the use of alternative sampling sites is reliability because inaccuracy of the blood glucose measurements will affect the treatment and, thus, could be dangerous for clients. Empirical studies have been conducted to compare the blood glucose concentration levels at alternative body sites, such as the palm, forearm, thigh, calf and earlobe (Jungheim & Koschinsky 2002a, Bina et al 2003, Fedele et al 2003, Tieszen & New 2003, Dufaitrepatouraux et al 2004, Ferraz et al 2004, Shibata et al 2004, Toledo & Taylor 2004, Kempe et al 2005, Anzalone 2008, Knapp et al 2009, Ito et al 2010. Several studies have reported that blood glucose measurements taken at the forearm and thigh were less reliable in the presence of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia, after a meal and after exercise because the blood glucose concentration at these sites lagged behind that at the fingertip by 30-60 minutes (Ellison et al 2002, Bina et al 2003, Fedele et al 2003.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%