Development and piloting of an acceptability questionnaire for continuous glucose monitoring devices

Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 95-101

  Steed, L ^a   Cooke, D ^a   Hurel, S J ^b   Newman, S P ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; DEVICE; DIABETES MELLITUS; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DISEASE DURATION; FEMALE; GLUCOSE BLOOD LEVEL; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MALE; MATURITY ONSET DIABETES MELLITUS; OUTPATIENT CARE; PATIENT CARE; PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; TECHNIQUE; TECHNOLOGY;

ADULT; BLOOD GLUCOSE; BLOOD GLUCOSE SELF-MONITORING; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 38949094208     PISSN: 15209156     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/dia.2007.0255     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group: The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1993;329:977-986.
2. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group: Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998;352:837-853.
3. American Diabetes Association Position Statement. Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007;30(Suppl):S4-S41.
4. Bode BW, Sabbah H, Davidson PC: What's ahead in glucose monitoring? New techniques hold promise for improved ease and accuracy. Postgrad Med 2001;109(4):41-49.
5. Bolinder J, HagstromToft E, Ungerstedt U, Arner P: Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type I diabetic patients: comparison with continuous microdialysis measurements of glucose in subcutaneous adipose tissue during ordinary life conditions. Diabetes Care 1997;20:64-70.
6. Karter AJ, Ferrara A, Darbinian JA, Ackerson LM, Selby JV: Self-monitoring of blood glucose: language and financial barriers in a managed care population with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2000;23:477-483.
7. Ginsberg BH: An overview of minimally invasive technologies. Clin Chem 1992;38:1596-1600.
8. Heinemann L: Glucose monitoring: today and tomorrow. Infusystems Int 2004;3:9-14.
9. Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) Study Group: Youth and parent satisfaction with clinical use of the GlucoWatch G2 Biographer in the management of pediatric type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2005;28:1929-1935.
10. McCreadie C, Tinker A: The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing Soc 2005;25:91-110.
11. Heinemann L: Clinical development of continuous glucose monitoring systems: consideration for the optimal strategy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;74(Suppl 2):S82-S92.
12. Cauza E, Hanusch-Enserer U, Strasser B, Ludvik B, Kostner K, Dunky A, Haber P: Continuous glucose monitoring in diabetic long distance runners. Int J Sports Med 2005;26:774-780.
13. Jungheim K, Wientjes KJ, Heinemann L, Lodwig V, Koschinsky T, Schoonen AJ: Subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring: feasibility of a new microdialysis-based glucose sensor system. Diabetes Care 2001;24:1696-1697.
14. Jeha GS, Karaviti LP, Anderson B, Smith EO, Donaldson S, McGirk TS, Haymond MW: Continuous glucose monitoring and the reality of metabolic control in preschool children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2004;27:2881-2886.
15. Chico A, Vidal-Rios P, Subira M, Novials A: The continuous glucose monitoring system is useful for detecting unrecognized hypoglycemias in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes but is not better than frequent capillary glucose measurements for improving metabolic control. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1153-1157.
16. Papworth A, Hurel SJ: Non-invasive GlucoWatch - the future or big brother watching? Patient expectation, experience and results. Diabet Med 2001;18(Suppl 2):35.
17. Krimholtz MJ, Pickup JC: First clinical experiences with the Glucowatch Biographer. Diabet Med 2001;18(Suppl 2):115.
18. Lenzen H, Barrow BA, White S, Holman RR: The Glucowatch Biographer - a useful home monitoring device for patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med 2001;18(Suppl 2):115.
19. Todd C, Bradley C: Evaluating the design and development of psychological scales. In: Bradley C, ed. Handbook of Psychology and Diabetes: A Guide to Psychological Measurement in Diabetes Research and Practice. Reading, UK: Harwood, 1994:15-42.
20. Ritchie J, Spencer L: Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, eds. Analyzing Qualitative Data. London: Routledge, 1994:173-194.
21. Lacey A, Luff D: Trent Focus for Research and Development in Primary Health Care: An Introduction to Qualitative Data Analysis. Nottingham, UK: Trent Focus, 1991.
22. McGee HM, O'Boyle CA, Hickey A: Assessing the quality of life of the individual: the SEIQoL with a health and with a gastroenterology unit population. Psychol Med 1991;21;749-759.
23. Bradley C, Todd C, Gorton T, Symonds E, Martin A, Plowright R: The development of an individualized questionnaire measure of perceived impact of diabetes on quality of life: the ADDQoL. Qual Life Res 1999;8:79-91.
24. Wolfe AK, Bjornstad DJ, Russell M, Kirner ND: A framework for analyzing dialogues over the acceptability of controversial technologies. Sci Technol Human Values 2002;27:134-159.