Skip to content

Patient and Provider Glucose Reporting Preferences Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP)

Understanding Patient and Provider Glucose Reporting Preferences in Type 1 Diabetes: Cloud Based Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP)

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02074384
Enrollment
161
Registered
2014-02-28
Start date
2014-03-31
Completion date
2015-07-31
Last updated
2016-03-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Type 1 Diabetes

Brief summary

International Diabetes Center (IDC) proposes a preference and usability study of glucose data acquisition and reporting, evaluating streamlined standardized cloud-based glucose reporting including work flow as well as patient and clinician preference at Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) Exchange sites to enhance standard Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) reporting. This phase 2 project assesses the efficacy of standardized glucose data report generation and preferred report presentation format; both are necessary to increase use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data to improve care processes and outcomes for Type 1 diabetes.

Detailed description

Patient participation in diabetes treatment has relied upon episodic self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). SMBG assists patients and clinicians with adjustments of insulin, identification of hypoglycemia, nutritional intake and activity in order to optimize diabetes control. SMBG however is subject to bias dependent upon the testing frequency and timing. In contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems capture continuous 24-hour glucose data uninterrupted and unbiased. It provides valuable information about daily/nightly alterations in glucose patterns. Unfortunately SMBG, CGM and insulin pump devices have proprietary software with unique data standards, acquisition methods, reports, and graphic displays. These differences make evaluation and comparison of SMBG or CGM data difficult for clinicians and patients. IDC created an Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) report to reduce challenges of device specific reports through a standardized report which is produced from any device with streamlined graphic displays of glucose trends. The phase 1 project (2012), gathered expert stakeholders (clinical, research, industry, patients) who validated data standards and recommended changes to the CGM-AGP reports. These changes are now integrated into a secure cloud-based infrastructure for AGP reporting. Phase 2 of this project is a usability and preference study of glucose reporting systems. It will include an in depth study of 6 T1D Ex clinical sites. The T1D Exchange Clinic Network was formed to support the development of a large registry of adults and children with type 1 diabetes for the purpose of conducting multiple studies proposed by T1D Exchange investigators, and other researchers, patients, and companies. The 6 sites will be selected for an in-depth study utilizing middleware data collection services (Diasend or SweetSpot) to facilitate efficient collection of data from diverse devices. These middleware solutions integrate with the captūrAGP system to automatically produce an AGP report. These sites will test the feasibility of AGP cloud reporting while collecting patient and clinician opinions on report preference. All 6 sites participating in phase 2 will collect patient and clinician preference measures. Two study sites will undergo time in motion (TIM) measurement and workflow mapping of current process. This TIM sub-study includes workflow mapping of current and cloud-based processes utilizing Toyota Lean (Kaizen) methodology. Sites 3 - 6 will receive enhanced designs through the adaptive trial method with learnings applied from sites 1 and 2. A key deliverable of this study is patient and clinician insight into their utilization of CGM reporting technologies. Recognizing that adoption of technology is often stymied by time constraints, report reliability and ease of interpretation, these variables will be examined. The goal of phase 2 is to analyze the viability of standard reporting and to evaluate preference (patient and clinicians) for and perceived value of different types of glucose pattern reports (AGP vs. device) including clinical practice time saved.

Interventions

DEVICEContinuous Glucose Monitor

CGM device for measurement of interstitial glucose on a 24/7 continuous cycle.

Participants will use their own SMBG device.

Survey of clinicians after study visits

Sponsors

The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
CollaboratorOTHER
HealthPartners Institute
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
7 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Type 1 Diabetics

Exclusion criteria

* Less than the age of 7 * Non-English Speaker

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Portion of Study Participants Reporting Greater Utility From AGP vs. Traditional Glucose Data ReportsAt the end of the two week SMBG or CGM periodPatients will use either SMBG or CGM for a two week period following their screening visit. At the end of the two week period they will return to the study site to download their device and have an AGP report printed. They will then complete a preference and utility survey.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Continuous Glucose Monitoring
Participants will wear Continuous Glucose Monitoring for two weeks. Continuous Glucose Monitor: CGM device for measurement of interstitial glucose on a 24/7 continuous cycle.
74
Self Monitoring Blood Glucose
Participants will self test for two weeks. Self Monitoring Blood Glucose: Participants will use their own SMBG device.
70
Clinicians
Clinicians completing the study visits.
17
Total161

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSelf Monitoring Blood GlucoseCliniciansContinuous Glucose MonitoringTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
32 Participants0 Participants40 Participants72 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
2 Participants0 Participants0 Participants2 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
36 Participants17 Participants34 Participants87 Participants
Age, Continuous28.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.7
NA years24.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.5
26.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.8
Region of Enrollment
United States
70 participants17 participants74 participants161 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
38 ParticipantsNA Participants34 ParticipantsNA Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
32 ParticipantsNA Participants40 ParticipantsNA Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 700 / 700 / 17
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 700 / 700 / 17

Outcome results

Primary

Portion of Study Participants Reporting Greater Utility From AGP vs. Traditional Glucose Data Reports

Patients will use either SMBG or CGM for a two week period following their screening visit. At the end of the two week period they will return to the study site to download their device and have an AGP report printed. They will then complete a preference and utility survey.

Time frame: At the end of the two week SMBG or CGM period

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Continuous Glucose MonitoringPortion of Study Participants Reporting Greater Utility From AGP vs. Traditional Glucose Data Reports35 participants
Self Monitoring Blood GlucosePortion of Study Participants Reporting Greater Utility From AGP vs. Traditional Glucose Data Reports29 participants
CliniciansPortion of Study Participants Reporting Greater Utility From AGP vs. Traditional Glucose Data Reports10 participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026