11 Responses

  1. Traci
    Traci December 15, 2009 at 8:57 am | | Reply

    Interesting device. Thanks for sharing, I’ll have to look into it more.

  2. mcityrk
    mcityrk December 15, 2009 at 8:05 pm | | Reply

    Hi Amy-

    Small request. If you are going to allow such promotion of a device [whether justified or not], shouldn’t you actually decribe what it does and how/why that translates into an improved patient experience. it does not seem that merely knowing one’s glucose levels and recording them has to translate into lower A1C and that seems to be the claim here. What am I missing?? Thanks

  3. mcityrk
    mcityrk December 16, 2009 at 2:56 am | | Reply

    Ah, never mind, now I see how this works. The key phrase in the writeup was: [Daily BG monitoring frequency was sustained and at very high levels above norms], i.e. enough daily data is being taken to safely allow behavior modification [dietary adjustments or insulin schedules] so that the frequency and severity of hyperglycemic excursions can be reduced and lower fasting values can be reached while maintaining reasonable safety, thus pushing down average glucose over time. The extension of this mechanism is that one who only infrequently monitors glucose levels would be expected to see no improvement using this device. While this device may provide a significant incentive for more frequent glucose measurements, it will never be a substitute for it.

  4. Steve
    Steve December 16, 2009 at 5:43 am | | Reply

    The GlucoMON is not as much a device as it is a data delivery portal into a wireless system that supports the PWD. We’re often too focused on the technology surrounding our diabetes. The system behind the GlucoMON (quietly running in the background) is what drives the results we saw. First, it was beyond easy to use. Second, it simplified the patient’s data stream and handed it right back to them so they could decide what to do. Third, the medical team was not required to play “air traffic control” with everyone’s BG data (we were not even allowed to see it!). GlucoMON is an empowering feedback tool. Among other things, our study suggests our existing diabetes self care technologies (e.g., SMBG) can be leveraged towards improved control by reducing, not increasing, the users effort!

  5. Doug
    Doug December 16, 2009 at 7:40 am | | Reply

    Ive read this twice and some of the links and still dont understand. Isnt it true that getting more BG data and acting on it is the key ? And also the barrier ? Kids and adults dont test and dont act on it. How does this system help someone who isnt testing and wont act on the tests they take ?

  6. Felix Kasza
    Felix Kasza December 16, 2009 at 11:42 am | | Reply

    A “clinical trial” that charges its enrollees for the privilege, and lets its participants self-select.

    I believe the true breakthrough here is that the company has figured out how to sell a medical device before FDA approval.

  7. Doug
    Doug December 16, 2009 at 2:27 pm | | Reply

    There has been a charge to participate since day one
    “The cost of supporting this research is sometimes sponsored for the participant and in other cases participants are asked to pay all or a portion of the costs of conducting the research.”

  8. Steve
    Steve December 16, 2009 at 3:30 pm | | Reply

    This particular study was conducted under a grant from a local diabetes foundation here. In fact the protocol was originally submitted for a Robert Wood Johnson Grant and we made finalist (a high honor) even though the funding was not provided and we went with another grantor. No patient was ever charged for the device or service. All costs were covered by the grant. Actually, GlucoMON’s are never “bought”. They are leased. It would be similar in concept to how you get a cell phone, except that you don’t buy the GlucoMON like you would a cell phone, the company leases the device to a PWD or uses it under a research protocol. Costs are for the access to the wireless network. I hope that helps.

  9. Kevin McMahon
    Kevin McMahon April 10, 2012 at 4:08 am | | Reply

    The randomized controlled trial that Dr. Ponder describes above is now published in the ADA’s journal Diabetes Care:

    According to a comparison of two studies published in the print edition of “Diabetes Care” in early 2012, frequent pattern management (review of spot blood sugar measurements for trends) made possible by specialized handheld cellular devices, advances in wireless networks and mobile health technology (ie – GlucoMON®-ADMS by Diabetech, LP) delivers superior results compared to either:

    Conventional Self Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) – based on analysis of the recently published ADMS study conducted by the Morris Lichtenstein Medical Research Foundation (Published online before print February 1, 2012, doi:10.2337/dc11-1597 Diabetes Care February 1, 2012) – http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2012/01/25/dc11-1597.abstract

    Continuous Glucose Monitoring systems (CGM/CGMS) – based on analysis of the recently published CGM study conducted by DirecNet (Published online before print; December 30, 2011, doi:10.2337/dc11-1746 Diabetes Care February 2012vol. 35 no. 2 204-210) – http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/35/2/204.abstract

    In summary, this trial proves that at least weekly review of blood sugars for patterns significantly reduces A1c and self-care skills vs. no review which is what pretty much exists for anyone with diabetes today. The technology made it easy for anyone to perform the frequent review.

Leave a Reply