Diabetes MellitusDIAMONDSNCT01804803
DIgital Assisted MONitoring for DiabeteS - I
A study testing Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server. and Use of regular glucometer in people with Diabetes Mellitus, run by University of Bari at 3 sites in Italy.
Trial summary
The study aims to validate the clinical efficacy of a telemedicine- and web-based system platform for Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data transmission and analysis in terms of improved metabolic control, assessed by measuring changes in HbA1c, in insulin-treated diabetic patients. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Diabetes Mellitus
- What is being tested?
- Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server. and Use of regular glucometer
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 123 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesItaly
- Study dates
- 9 Sep 2013to 30 Nov 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- males and females
- age 18-70 yrs;
- insulin-treated diabetes (both type 1 and type 2 diabetes treated with at least 3 injections/day);
- diabetes diagnosis from at least 1 year;
- inadequate glycemic control (HbA1c ranging from 7.0% to 10.0%; local measurements within the last 6 weeks);
- ability and willingness to carry out SMBG;
- informed consent.
Who cannot join
- diagnosis of diabetes within less than 1 year;
- impending complications of diabetes: proliferative retinopathy or maculopathy (with significant loss of visual function), severe renal failure (eGFR <30), severe neuropathy (autonomic dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, gastroparesis);
- clinically significant, active (over the past 12 months) disease of the cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neurological, genito-urinary, haematological systems or severe uncontrolled hypertension (SBP >180 mmHg; DBP >100 mmHg);
- diagnosis of active neoplasia within the last 5 years (history of chemotherapy or radiation treated malignancy within 5 years prior to study procedure, except for lymphoma);
- pregnancy or intention to become pregnant during the study;
- poor compliance to study procedures.
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
Italy3 sites
University of Bari Aldo Moro
Bari, BA, 70124
University of Foggia
Foggia
IRCSS Casa Sollievo Sofferenza
San Giovanni Rotondo, FG
About this study
Official title: A Telemedicine-based Intervention Study Involving Real-time and Anywhere Transmission of Blood Glucose Data to a Decision Supported Software-assisted Server With Web-based Analysis of Data and Medical Feedback on Metabolic Control.
The study aims to validate the clinical efficacy of a telemedicine- and web-based system platform for Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data transmission and analysis in terms of improved metabolic control, assessed by measuring changes in HbA1c, in insulin-treated diabetic patients. The system platform involves (i.) systematic (real-time and anywhere) transmission of SMBG data to a decision supported software (DSS)-assisted server, (ii.) web-based analysis of data, and (iii.) feedback on patients and medical staff to implement metabolic control. The expected outcome is that using this telemedicine-based system with transmission of SMBG data, web-based analysis of data and medical feedback to patients and medical team will improve glucose control in insulin-treated individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Read the detailed description
Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is currently recommended in all type 1 diabetic patients and type 2 diabetic treated with insulin (≥4 glucose testing per day), as a tool to favor achievement of glucose control. It is still debated whether SMBG is also useful to achieve improved glucose control in non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes due to discordant results from intervention trials [Farmer AJ, 2009]. In general, it is assumed that the usefulness of SMBG is fully met when SMBG is performed in a structured manner, and both the patient and medical team make use of the SMBG results to optimize lifestyle and drug therapy; this should result in more effective control of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, resulting in less glucose variability [IDF, 2009]. SMBG is currently performed by a majority of diabetic patients, including non-insulin treated type 2 patients; however, the SMGB procedure is often far from being satisfactory due to inappropriate frequency of testing, data collection and data analysis, resulting in a suboptimal impact on disease management. Thus, multiple unmet needs currently exist in the SMBG procedure, which could be resolved by (i.) implementing appropriate SMBG testing frequencies (# blood glucose (BG) tests/day-week-month); (ii.) temporally localizing BG tests with respect to fasting periods vs. meals/snacks; (iii.) improving the quality control of the SMBG procedure (use of strips, calibration, testing, data collection and analysis); (iv.) making SMBG results available for statistical and medical analyses to monitor diabetes status and adjust lifestyle and drug therapy when needed; (v.) providing the patient with appropriate feed-back driven by SMBG data analysis; and (vi.) monitoring real-time SMBG data to detect emergency situations (e.g., severe hypoglycemia, persistent hyperglycemia) to assist the patient with appropriate and timely interventions.
There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that telemedicine is an effective intervention for improving glucose control. Use of telephone contacts, video-conferencing, personal digital assistants and web-based systems offer new opportunities to bridge the gap in support for patients with diabetes between face to face visits with their health care providers. Several small-scale and non-randomized studies have found that patients exposed to telemonitoring interventions had lower HbA1c values than those without. Moreover, larger randomized controlled studies have also shown promising results. In the most comprehensive randomized comparison of telemonitoring interventions yet completed, the IDEATel study, 1,665 participants were randomized to a telemedicine unit or conventional care. At 1 year, patients in intervention group showed significantly lower HbA1c (-0.38 % p<0.01), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, (respectively, -3.4 mmHg, p= 0.001; -1.9 mmHg, p<0.001), and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (-9.5 mg/dL, p< 0.001). In patients blindly assessed annually over a period of five years, it was found that the telemedicine group scored better than the standard care group on virtually all outcome measures at each annual evaluation. Mortality was not different between the groups, although power was limited [Shea S, 2009]. More recently, Charpentier et al., in a six-month multicenter study, enrolled 180 adult patients with type 1 diabetes on a basal-bolus insulin regimen, with baseline HbA1c ≥8%. Patients were randomized to either usual quarterly follow-up, or home use of a smartphone recommending insulin doses with quarterly visits, or use of the smartphone with short teleconsultations every two weeks but no visit until endpoint (Diabeo system). Use of the Diabeo system yielded a 0.91% decrease in HbA1c over controls and a 0.67% decrease in HbA1c 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 using the Diabeo system spent nearly 5 h less than patients in other groups in attending hospital visits [Charpentier G, 2011]. Similarly, Bujnowska-Fedak et al enrolled a total of 100 adult patients with type 2 diabetes, divided between insulin- and non-insulin-requiring, in a randomized, controlled trial aimed at investigating the effects of telehome monitoring. The experimental group (n = 50) received an in-home wireless glucose monitor and transmitter, whereas the control group (n = 50) was instructed to follow the conventional arrangement. There was an overall reduction in HbA1c values in both experimental and control groups after 6 months. A significant difference in HbA1c values between the groups was observed only among the noninsulin-requiring patients. The experimental group reported considerably less hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic events. The profile of the patient who benefited the most from telemonitoring consisted of older, more educated patients, who had acquired the disease relatively recently, and who spent most of the time at home. The experimental group had higher overall scores on quality of life measures and sense of control over diabetes [Bujnowska-Fedak MM, 2011]. A recent meta-analysis of 22 trials and a total of 1,657 participants showed that mobile phone interventions for diabetes self-management reduced HbA1c values by a mean of 0.5% over a median of 6-month follow-up duration. Interestingly, type 2 diabetes patients reported significantly greater reductions in HbA1c than type 1 diabetes patients (0.8 vs. 0.3%; P = 0.02) [Liang X, 2011]. In conclusion, telemedicine case management intervention and tele-home care may potentially assist in daily diabetes management via the establishment of an active interaction between diabetic patients and healthcare professionals. However, further evidence is warranted, particularly when considering new innovative systems with a potential for implementation of patient's assistance and of diabetes drug therapy remotely.
We have recently developed a telemedicine system [Glucoonline®, 2011], which consists of a smartphone-connected glucometer, a software-implemented smartphone for real-time and anywhere BG data collection and transmission to a remote server, and a Decision Supported Software (DSS)-assisted server capable of performing data collection and analysis, and providing feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms. A pilot study showing the feasibility of using this system in 10 individuals with type 1 diabetes treated with a multiple daily injection (MDI) regimen over a 3-month period has been already carried out [Giorgino F, data on file]. We believe that this system could be now utilized in a prospective randomized controlled trial to investigate its suitability to enable improved glucose control in insulin-treated individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.
- Conditions
- Diabetes Mellitus
- Being tested
- Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server., Use of regular glucometer
- Keywords
- glycated hemoglobin, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, insulin, self-monitoring of blood glucose, telemedicine
- Medical subject headings
- Diabetes Mellitus, Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemia, Insulin Resistance
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server.Procedure or surgery
Device is a smartphone-connected glucometer. The smartphone will be implemented with a software for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to the remote server. Thus, the glucometer will be made "hot" for real-time and anywhere data transmission. In addition, at the time of blood glucose measuring, the patient will enter information on whether the measurement is being performed in the pre-prandial, post-prandial or absorptive periods, and will indicate which meals the measurement refers to (i.e., breakfast, lunch, dinner, snack). SMBG results will be immediately transmitted to the remote server, which will perform data collection and analysis, and provide feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms (Decision Supported Software, DSS).
Use of regular glucometerProcedure or surgery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| T-SMBG | Experimental | This group will perform SMBG using a smartphone-connected glucometer implemented with a software for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to the remote server. SMBG results will be immediately transmitted to the remote server, which will perform data collection and analysis, and provide feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms (Decision Supported Software, DSS). A specific algorithm incorporated into the DSS will allow the patients to self-calculate the dose of basal insulin to be administered according to the measured fasting blood glucose levels for consecutive periods of three days. Glucose data and analyses will be made accessible to the patients and medical staff anytime and anywhere via the web. Patients will be also assisted by the diabetes medical team located at or connected with a call center 24-hours/day, 7 days/week. Receives: Procedure: Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server. |
| SMBG | Active comparator | This group will perform SMBG using a regular glucometer and will report glucose data on paper charts (or download data from the glucometer onto the PC) at the planned study visits. Patients will not receive feed-back on their glucose levels nor instructions on how to potentially modify their drug therapy except when undergoing medical visits at the planned intervals. Patients, finally, will not be assisted by the diabetes team/call center. Receives: Procedure: Use of regular glucometer |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes in HbA1c from baseline value
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Secondary outcomes (13)
Changes in HbA1c from baseline value in relation to HbA1c value at baseline
Measured: 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c >8.5% at 3 and 6 months
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c <7.0% at 3 and 6 months
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c <6.5% at 3 and 6 months
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Differences in fasting blood glucose levels
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Differences in blood glucose levels in the pre-prandial and post-prandial phases; meal-related glucose excursions (post/pre-meal "delta")
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Frequency of hypoglycaemic episodes and relationship with changes in therapy
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Changes in therapy (drug type and doses; in relation to SMBG values)
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Appropriateness of glucose testing (% conformity based on recommended frequency of testing, also in relation to meals)
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Indices of glucose variability (Kovatchev's LBGI, HBGI, ADRR)
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Quality of life
Measured: 6-month
Proportion of subjects with eGFR less than 60 and high LBGI, HBGI, or ADRR indices
Measured: 3-month, 6-month
Subgroup analyses of changes in HbA1c from baseline according to patients' age (<45 yrs, >45yrs), type of diabetes (type 1, type 2), and diabetes duration (<5 yrs, >5 yrs)
Measured: 6-month
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Mar 2013 (estimated)
- Study start9 Sep 2013
- Primary completion30 Nov 2017
- Study completion30 Nov 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Diabetes MellitusStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 123 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Bari
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Eli Lilly and Company, LifeScan
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Francesco Giorgino, M.D., Ph.D., University of Bari
- Investigators
- Francesco Giorgino, M.D., Ph.D., Principal investigator, University of Bari Aldo Moro
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01804803
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- DIAMONDS-I
- Acronym
- DIAMONDS
- Status last verified
- Jun 2020
- First submitted
- 25 Feb 2013
- Last updated
- 4 Jun 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Bujnowska-Fedak MM, Puchala E, Steciwko A. The impact of telehome care on health status and quality of life among patients with diabetes in a primary care setting in Poland. Telemed J E Health. 2011 Apr;17(3):153-63. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2010.0113. Epub 2011 Mar 5.
PubMed 21375410Charpentier G, Benhamou PY, Dardari D, Clergeot A, Franc S, Schaepelynck-Belicar P, Catargi B, Melki V, Chaillous L, Farret A, Bosson JL, Penfornis A; TeleDiab Study Group. 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). Diabetes Care. 2011 Mar;34(3):533-9. doi: 10.2337/dc10-1259. Epub 2011 Jan 25.
PubMed 21266648Liang X, Wang Q, Yang X, Cao J, Chen J, Mo X, Huang J, Wang L, Gu D. Effect of mobile phone intervention for diabetes on glycaemic control: a meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 2011 Apr;28(4):455-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03180.x.
PubMed 21392066Shea S, Weinstock RS, Teresi JA, Palmas W, Starren J, Cimino JJ, Lai AM, Field L, Morin PC, Goland R, Izquierdo RE, Ebner S, Silver S, Petkova E, Kong J, Eimicke JP; IDEATel Consortium. A randomized trial comparing telemedicine case management with usual care in older, ethnically diverse, medically underserved patients with diabetes mellitus: 5 year results of the IDEATel study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Jul-Aug;16(4):446-56. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M3157. Epub 2009 Apr 23.
PubMed 19390093Di Molfetta S, Patruno P, Cormio S, Cignarelli A, Paleari R, Mosca A, Lamacchia O, De Cosmo S, Massa M, Natalicchio A, Perrini S, Laviola L, Giorgino F. A telemedicine-based approach with real-time transmission of blood glucose data improves metabolic control in insulin-treated diabetes: the DIAMONDS randomized clinical trial. J Endocrinol Invest. 2022 Sep;45(9):1663-1671. doi: 10.1007/s40618-022-01802-w. Epub 2022 Apr 27.
PubMed 35476320
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Jun 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Telemedicine-based Intervention Study Involving Real-time and Anywhere Transmission of Blood Glucose Data to a Decision Supported Software-assisted Server With Web-based Analysis of Data and Medical Feedback on Metabolic Control.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01804803
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DIAMONDS / DIAMONDS-I
- Conditions
- Diabetes Mellitus
- Keywords
- glycated hemoglobin, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, insulin, self-monitoring of blood glucose, telemedicine
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 123 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of BariUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Eli Lilly and Company, LifeScan
- Study start
- 9 Sep 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Nov 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Nov 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Mar 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The study aims to validate the clinical efficacy of a telemedicine- and web-based system platform for Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data transmission and analysis in terms of improved metabolic control, assessed by measuring changes in HbA1c, in insulin-treated diabetic patients. The system platform involves (i.) systematic (real-time and anywhere) transmission of SMBG data to a decision supported software (DSS)-assisted server, (ii.) web-based analysis of data, and (iii.) feedback on patients and medical staff to implement metabolic control. The expected outcome is that using this telemedicine-based system with transmission of SMBG data, web-based analysis of data and medical feedback to patients and medical team will improve glucose control in insulin-treated individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Detailed description
Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is currently recommended in all type 1 diabetic patients and type 2 diabetic treated with insulin (≥4 glucose testing per day), as a tool to favor achievement of glucose control. It is still debated whether SMBG is also useful to achieve improved glucose control in non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes due to discordant results from intervention trials [Farmer AJ, 2009]. In general, it is assumed that the usefulness of SMBG is fully met when SMBG is performed in a structured manner, and both the patient and medical team make use of the SMBG results to optimize lifestyle and drug therapy; this should result in more effective control of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, resulting in less glucose variability [IDF, 2009]. SMBG is currently performed by a majority of diabetic patients, including non-insulin treated type 2 patients; however, the SMGB procedure is often far from being satisfactory due to inappropriate frequency of testing, data collection and data analysis, resulting in a suboptimal impact on disease management. Thus, multiple unmet needs currently exist in the SMBG procedure, which could be resolved by (i.) implementing appropriate SMBG testing frequencies (# blood glucose (BG) tests/day-week-month); (ii.) temporally localizing BG tests with respect to fasting periods vs. meals/snacks; (iii.) improving the quality control of the SMBG procedure (use of strips, calibration, testing, data collection and analysis); (iv.) making SMBG results available for statistical and medical analyses to monitor diabetes status and adjust lifestyle and drug therapy when needed; (v.) providing the patient with appropriate feed-back driven by SMBG data analysis; and (vi.) monitoring real-time SMBG data to detect emergency situations (e.g., severe hypoglycemia, persistent hyperglycemia) to assist the patient with appropriate and timely interventions.
There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that telemedicine is an effective intervention for improving glucose control. Use of telephone contacts, video-conferencing, personal digital assistants and web-based systems offer new opportunities to bridge the gap in support for patients with diabetes between face to face visits with their health care providers. Several small-scale and non-randomized studies have found that patients exposed to telemonitoring interventions had lower HbA1c values than those without. Moreover, larger randomized controlled studies have also shown promising results. In the most comprehensive randomized comparison of telemonitoring interventions yet completed, the IDEATel study, 1,665 participants were randomized to a telemedicine unit or conventional care. At 1 year, patients in intervention group showed significantly lower HbA1c (-0.38 % p<0.01), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, (respectively, -3.4 mmHg, p= 0.001; -1.9 mmHg, p<0.001), and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (-9.5 mg/dL, p< 0.001). In patients blindly assessed annually over a period of five years, it was found that the telemedicine group scored better than the standard care group on virtually all outcome measures at each annual evaluation. Mortality was not different between the groups, although power was limited [Shea S, 2009]. More recently, Charpentier et al., in a six-month multicenter study, enrolled 180 adult patients with type 1 diabetes on a basal-bolus insulin regimen, with baseline HbA1c ≥8%. Patients were randomized to either usual quarterly follow-up, or home use of a smartphone recommending insulin doses with quarterly visits, or use of the smartphone with short teleconsultations every two weeks but no visit until endpoint (Diabeo system). Use of the Diabeo system yielded a 0.91% decrease in HbA1c over controls and a 0.67% decrease in HbA1c 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 using the Diabeo system spent nearly 5 h less than patients in other groups in attending hospital visits [Charpentier G, 2011]. Similarly, Bujnowska-Fedak et al enrolled a total of 100 adult patients with type 2 diabetes, divided between insulin- and non-insulin-requiring, in a randomized, controlled trial aimed at investigating the effects of telehome monitoring. The experimental group (n = 50) received an in-home wireless glucose monitor and transmitter, whereas the control group (n = 50) was instructed to follow the conventional arrangement. There was an overall reduction in HbA1c values in both experimental and control groups after 6 months. A significant difference in HbA1c values between the groups was observed only among the noninsulin-requiring patients. The experimental group reported considerably less hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic events. The profile of the patient who benefited the most from telemonitoring consisted of older, more educated patients, who had acquired the disease relatively recently, and who spent most of the time at home. The experimental group had higher overall scores on quality of life measures and sense of control over diabetes [Bujnowska-Fedak MM, 2011]. A recent meta-analysis of 22 trials and a total of 1,657 participants showed that mobile phone interventions for diabetes self-management reduced HbA1c values by a mean of 0.5% over a median of 6-month follow-up duration. Interestingly, type 2 diabetes patients reported significantly greater reductions in HbA1c than type 1 diabetes patients (0.8 vs. 0.3%; P = 0.02) [Liang X, 2011]. In conclusion, telemedicine case management intervention and tele-home care may potentially assist in daily diabetes management via the establishment of an active interaction between diabetic patients and healthcare professionals. However, further evidence is warranted, particularly when considering new innovative systems with a potential for implementation of patient's assistance and of diabetes drug therapy remotely.
We have recently developed a telemedicine system [Glucoonline®, 2011], which consists of a smartphone-connected glucometer, a software-implemented smartphone for real-time and anywhere BG data collection and transmission to a remote server, and a Decision Supported Software (DSS)-assisted server capable of performing data collection and analysis, and providing feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms. A pilot study showing the feasibility of using this system in 10 individuals with type 1 diabetes treated with a multiple daily injection (MDI) regimen over a 3-month period has been already carried out [Giorgino F, data on file]. We believe that this system could be now utilized in a prospective randomized controlled trial to investigate its suitability to enable improved glucose control in insulin-treated individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| T-SMBG | Experimental | Procedure: Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server.This group will perform SMBG using a smartphone-connected glucometer implemented with a software for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to the remote server. SMBG results will be immediately transmitted to the remote server, which will perform data collection and analysis, and provide feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms (Decision Supported Software, DSS). A specific algorithm incorporated into the DSS will allow the patients to self-calculate the dose of basal insulin to be administered according to the measured fasting blood glucose levels for consecutive periods of three days. Glucose data and analyses will be made accessible to the patients and medical staff anytime and anywhere via the web. Patients will be also assisted by the diabetes medical team located at or connected with a call center 24-hours/day, 7 days/week. |
| SMBG | Active comparator | Procedure: Use of regular glucometerThis group will perform SMBG using a regular glucometer and will report glucose data on paper charts (or download data from the glucometer onto the PC) at the planned study visits. Patients will not receive feed-back on their glucose levels nor instructions on how to potentially modify their drug therapy except when undergoing medical visits at the planned intervals. Patients, finally, will not be assisted by the diabetes team/call center. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- males and females
- age 18-70 yrs;
- insulin-treated diabetes (both type 1 and type 2 diabetes treated with at least 3 injections/day);
- diabetes diagnosis from at least 1 year;
- inadequate glycemic control (HbA1c ranging from 7.0% to 10.0%; local measurements within the last 6 weeks);
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- diagnosis of diabetes within less than 1 year;
- impending complications of diabetes: proliferative retinopathy or maculopathy (with significant loss of visual function), severe renal failure (eGFR <30), severe neuropathy (autonomic dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, gastroparesis);
- clinically significant, active (over the past 12 months) disease of the cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neurological, genito-urinary, haematological systems or severe uncontrolled hypertension (SBP >180 mmHg; DBP >100 mmHg);
- diagnosis of active neoplasia within the last 5 years (history of chemotherapy or radiation treated malignancy within 5 years prior to study procedure, except for lymphoma);
- pregnancy or intention to become pregnant during the study;
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server.Device is a smartphone-connected glucometer. The smartphone will be implemented with a software for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to the remote server. Thus, the glucometer will be made "hot" for real-time and anywhere data transmission. In addition, at the time of blood glucose measuring, the patient will enter information on whether the measurement is being performed in the pre-prandial, post-prandial or absorptive periods, and will indicate which meals the measurement refers to (i.e., breakfast, lunch, dinner, snack). SMBG results will be immediately transmitted to the remote server, which will perform data collection and analysis, and provide feed-back to the patient and the medical staff according to pre-defined specific algorithms (Decision Supported Software, DSS). | Procedure or surgery | T-SMBG |
| Use of regular glucometer | Procedure or surgery | SMBG |
Primary outcome
Changes in HbA1c from baseline value
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
13 secondary outcomes
Changes in HbA1c from baseline value in relation to HbA1c value at baseline
Time frame: 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c >8.5% at 3 and 6 months
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c <7.0% at 3 and 6 months
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Percentages of patients with HbA1c <6.5% at 3 and 6 months
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Differences in fasting blood glucose levels
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Differences in blood glucose levels in the pre-prandial and post-prandial phases; meal-related glucose excursions (post/pre-meal "delta")
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Frequency of hypoglycaemic episodes and relationship with changes in therapy
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Changes in therapy (drug type and doses; in relation to SMBG values)
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Appropriateness of glucose testing (% conformity based on recommended frequency of testing, also in relation to meals)
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Indices of glucose variability (Kovatchev's LBGI, HBGI, ADRR)
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Quality of life
Time frame: 6-month
Proportion of subjects with eGFR less than 60 and high LBGI, HBGI, or ADRR indices
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month
Subgroup analyses of changes in HbA1c from baseline according to patients' age (<45 yrs, >45yrs), type of diabetes (type 1, type 2), and diabetes duration (<5 yrs, >5 yrs)
Time frame: 6-month
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Jun 2020.
- Background: PubMed 21375410Bujnowska-Fedak MM, Puchala E, Steciwko A. The impact of telehome care on health status and quality of life among patients with diabetes in a primary care setting in Poland. Telemed J E Health. 2011 Apr;17(3):153-63. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2010.0113. Epub 2011 Mar 5.
- Background: PubMed 21266648Charpentier G, Benhamou PY, Dardari D, Clergeot A, Franc S, Schaepelynck-Belicar P, Catargi B, Melki V, Chaillous L, Farret A, Bosson JL, Penfornis A; TeleDiab Study Group. 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). Diabetes Care. 2011 Mar;34(3):533-9. doi: 10.2337/dc10-1259. Epub 2011 Jan 25.
- Background: PubMed 21392066Liang X, Wang Q, Yang X, Cao J, Chen J, Mo X, Huang J, Wang L, Gu D. Effect of mobile phone intervention for diabetes on glycaemic control: a meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 2011 Apr;28(4):455-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03180.x.
- Background: PubMed 19390093Shea S, Weinstock RS, Teresi JA, Palmas W, Starren J, Cimino JJ, Lai AM, Field L, Morin PC, Goland R, Izquierdo RE, Ebner S, Silver S, Petkova E, Kong J, Eimicke JP; IDEATel Consortium. A randomized trial comparing telemedicine case management with usual care in older, ethnically diverse, medically underserved patients with diabetes mellitus: 5 year results of the IDEATel study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Jul-Aug;16(4):446-56. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M3157. Epub 2009 Apr 23.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35476320Di Molfetta S, Patruno P, Cormio S, Cignarelli A, Paleari R, Mosca A, Lamacchia O, De Cosmo S, Massa M, Natalicchio A, Perrini S, Laviola L, Giorgino F. A telemedicine-based approach with real-time transmission of blood glucose data improves metabolic control in insulin-treated diabetes: the DIAMONDS randomized clinical trial. J Endocrinol Invest. 2022 Sep;45(9):1663-1671. doi: 10.1007/s40618-022-01802-w. Epub 2022 Apr 27.
Related trials for Diabetes Mellitus
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly SHR-3167 Compared With Once-Daily Insulin Glargine in Adults With Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes
Active, not recruiting
Digital Reinforcement of Motivational Interviewing Micro-Skills Among Primary Care Healthcare Professionals
Hypertension (Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus)
Recruiting
Effects of Lean Pork Loin Intake on Protein Homeostasis and Glucose Regulation in Prediabetic Adults
Hyperglycaemia (Non Diabetic), Prediabetes
Recruiting
PAW-Hydrogel for Chronic Wound Healing
Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU), Pressure Ulcer (PU)
Recruiting
Investigating Vascular Properties of HEMI and SPG Signals in Individuals With or at Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease
Chronic Kidney Disease, Hypertension (HTN)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Francesco Giorgino, M.D., Ph.D. principal investigator
University of Bari Aldo Moro
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Use of software-implemented glucometer for real-time collection and transmission of measured glucose values to remote server. and Use of regular glucometer in people with Diabetes Mellitus, run by University of Bari at 3 sites in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Jun 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes in HbA1c from baseline value (time frame: 3-month, 6-month). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01804803, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Jun 2020.