Comparison of Satisfaction with Their Glucose Monitoring Device in Patients Using Flash Glucose Monitoring vs. Patients Using SMBG
Authors: HERMANNS NORBERT , EHRMANN DOMINIC , SCHIPFER MELANIE , HAAK THOMAS , KULZER BERNHARD 
Published: June 2018

Flash Glucose Monitoring offers several benefits to patients such as ease of use and no additional finger pricks. However, there are also some limitations that are being discussed such as perceived lack of accuracy and skin irritations. We analyzed different aspects of patients’ satisfaction with Flash Glucose Monitoring (Flash) by comparing Flash users to patients who use SMBG. We used the Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Survey that consists of 15 items with a scale range of 1 to 5. 133 patients who were using Flash for 7.9 ± 9.5 months were compared with 83 patients who used SMBG since diagnosis. As a measure of between-group differences for each item, Cohen's d was used to estimate the effect size. In general, Flash users were significantly more satisfied with how things were going with their diabetes (d = 0.31; p = 0.024). SMBG users indicated that measurement takes more time to use (d = 0.67; p &lt; 0.001), makes them worry more (d = 0.32; p = 0.024), is more of a hassle to use (d = 0.45; p = 0.002), and is more painful to use (d = 0.55; p &lt; 0.001) when compared to Flash users. Feeling frustrated with diabetes (d = 0.31; p = 0.027) as well as being depressed (d = 0.40; p = 0.002) were scored lower by Flash users. In addition, Flash users felt less restricted by their diabetes (d = 0.52; p &lt; 0.001) and more spontaneous (d = 0.67; p &lt; 0.001). Interestingly, there were no significant differences regarding the rating of accuracy (d = 0.19; p = 0.157), trusting the numbers (d = 0.01; p = 0.934), and skin irritations (d = 0.26; p = 0.053). The comparison demonstrated that there are several perceived benefits associated with using Flash. Ease of use and gaining more flexibility or feeling less restricted were important topics for Flash users. Possible limitations of Flash were not perceived as such by the users.

Disclosure

N. Hermanns: Speaker's Bureau; Self; Berlin-Chemie AG. Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott. Research Support; Self; Abbott. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott. Research Support; Self; Berlin-Chemie AG. Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Advisory Panel; Self; Roche Diabetes Care Health and Digital Solutions. Research Support; Self; Ypsomed AG, Dexcom, Inc.. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc. D. Ehrmann: Speaker's Bureau; Self; Berlin-Chemie AG. M. Schipfer: Speaker's Bureau; Self; Medtronic, Lilly Diabetes Germany. T. Haak: Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott. Advisory Panel; Self; Roche Diabetes Care Health and Digital Solutions, Sanofi, Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, AstraZeneca. B. Kulzer: Research Support; Self; Berlin-Chemie AG. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Berlin-Chemie AG, Novo Nordisk Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Roche Diabetes Care Health and Digital Solutions. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Roche Diabetes Care Health and Digital Solutions. Research Support; Self; Abbott. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott, Eli Lilly and Company. Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc., Medtronic, Ascensia Diabetes Care. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Ascensia Diabetes Care.