Evaluation of Blood Volume and Perceived Pain During Fingerstick Monitoring of Blood Glucose

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
• Interventions: Device: BD/33G; Device: OTM / 33G; Device: OTM/28G; Device: OTU/28G; Device: ACC/28G

• Registration Number: NCT00741390
• Lead Sponsor: Becton, Dickinson and Company

Brief Summary

The procurement of blood for SMBG, usually via a finger stick, is considered by many patients to be the most painful portion of diabetes therapy. This has led to the marketing of smaller gauge lancets, lancing devices with variable depth settings and blood glucose sensors that require less blood for measurement.

In this study, two main outcomes were evaluated: The first, which was assessed at Visit 1, was whether specific combinations of lancets and lancing devices would yield sufficient blood volume to allow valid assessment of diabetic subjects' glucose levels. The other outcome, assessed at Visit 2, was the level of pain perceived by subjects during lancing with specific combinations of lancets and lancing devices. During Visit 2, pain assessment was done using a Visual Analog Scale and such that for each lancet/lancing device, the lowest lancing device setting that yielded a valid BG reading for each subject during Visit 1 was used. A third outcome measure, overall comfort with lancing, was also assessed at Visit 2.

A total of 5 combinations of lancets and lancing devices were evaluated.

These were as follows:

* BD/33G = BD Lancet device/BD 33G lancets (BGM measured with the OneTouch® UltraMini™ (BGM) and OneTouch® Ultra® test strips)

* OTM/33G =OneTouch® Mini Lancet device / BD 33G lancet (BGM measured with the OneTouch® UltraMini™ (BGM) and OneTouch® Ultra® test strips)

* OTM/28G =OneTouch® Mini Lancet device / OneTouch® UltraSoft® 28G Lancet (BGM measured with the OneTouch® UltraMini™ (BGM) and OneTouch® Ultra® test strips)

* OTU/28G = OneTouch® UltraSoft® Lancet device/OneTouch® UltraSoft® 28G Lancet (BGM measured with the OneTouch® UltraMini™ (BGM) and OneTouch® Ultra® test strips)

* ACC/28G= Accu-Chek® Softclix Lancet device/Accu-Chek® Softclix 28G Lancet (BGM measured with Accu-Chek® Advantage BGM and Accu-Chek® Comfort Curve test strip)

After enrollment and qualification, subjects were assigned to one of 4 intervention arms. The arm assignment determined which 3 of the 5 combinations of lancets and lancing devices the subjects would evaluate in Visit 1 (for volume adequacy) and of these 3, which 2 they would evaluate in Visit 2 (pain during lancing). The lancet/lancing device combinations assigned to each arm are shown in the Assigned Interventions Table below.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2008-08
• Study First Submitted: 2008-08-22
• Study First Submitted QC: 2008-08-25
• Study First Posted: 2008-08-26
• Primary Completion: 2008-09
• Study Completion: 2008-09
• Results First Submitted: 2009-09-02
• Status Verified: 2010-03
• Results First Submitted QC: 2010-03-05
• Last Update Submitted: 2010-03-05
• Results First Posted: 2010-03-10
• Last Update Posted: 2010-03-10

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 250

Inclusion Criteria

• Must currently be diagnosed with either Type I or Type II diabetes mellitus.
• Must currently be performing self monitoring of blood glucose
• Must be between 18-70 years of age (inclusive).
• Must be able to read and follow study instructions in English.

Read More

Exclusion Criteria

• Pregnant (self reported)
• History of poor blood circulation.
• Any skin condition on his or her fingers that prevents blood sampling.
• History of a bleeding disorder.
• Neuropathy or other condition affecting sensation in the hands.
• Self-reported blood borne infection (e.g., HIV, hepatitis B or C [non A, non B], syphilis, malaria, babesiosis, brucellosis, leptospirosis, arboviral infections, relapsing fever, T lymphotropic virus Type 1, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease).
• Currently participating in another study
• Employed by BD, J&J, Roche or the Clinical Site.

Read More

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Arm A	OTM / 33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G, and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm A	BD/33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G, and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm A	OTM/28G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G, and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm B	BD/33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTU/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTU/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm B	OTM / 33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTU/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTU/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm B	OTU/28G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTU/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and OTU/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm C	BD/33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and ACC/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and ACC/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm C	OTM / 33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and ACC/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and ACC/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm C	ACC/28G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and ACC/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested BD/33G and ACC/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm D	BD/33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested OTM/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm D	OTM / 33G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested OTM/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.
Arm D	OTM/28G	In Visit 1 subjects tested BD/33G, OTM/33G and OTM/28G devices. In Visit 2 subjects tested OTM/33G and OTM/28G. See purpose for additional information.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Blood Sample of Sufficient Volume to Yield a Valid Meter Reading	Study Day 1 (Visit 1)	Number of subjects in whom valid meter reading was obtained with each device configuration. The primary outcome of a successful lancing is defined as whether or not a technician is able to use the lancing system to yield a blood sample of sufficient volume to yield a valid meter reading.
Difference in Lancing Pain for Device Pair at Visit 2. (For Subjects Assigned to Arms A, B, C Only)	Approximately Day 3 (Visit 2)	In Visit 2 subjects kept the same group assignment they had in Visit 1. Each subject tested 2 of the 3 systems from Visit 1. Up to 6 pairs of lancings were performed in order to obtain 4 evaluable pairs. After each pair of lancing, the subject was asked to record the pain from the 2nd lancing as compared to the first using a 150mm visual analog scale(0mm = same pain, -75mm = max score for less painful than first lancing,+75mm = max score for more painful). A positive value on the scale (and in table below) indicates that the first device in the pair was more painful than the second.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Difference in Lancing Pain for Devices in Visit 2 Only. (For Subjects Assigned to Arm D Only)	Approximately Day 3 (Visit 2)	The subjects who participated in Study Visit 2 kept the same group assignment they had in Study Visit 1. Each subject tested 2 of the 3 systems they experienced during Visit 1. Up to 6 pairs of lancings were performed in order to obtain 4 evaluable pairs.; After each pair of lancing, the subject was asked to record the difference in the pain they perceive between two lancing systems using the 150 mm visual analog scale. A positive value on the scale (and in the table below) indicates that the first device in the pair was more painful than the second.
Reported Device Preference Within Lancing Pair at Visit 2	Approximately Day 3 (Visit 2)	After each pair of 4 lancings, the subject was asked: "Which of the two devices did you find more comfortable, overall?" The choices were: first lancing, second lancing or equivalent. The "Stated Preference" row indicates # of lancing pairs in which one device was preferred over the other device while the 2 rows below indicate the # of pairs in which each device was preferred. First and second device refers to the 1st and 2nd devices identified in column headers, not the device order during testing. The "No Preference" row includes lancing pairs with preference of "equivalent" or no answer.

Trial Locations

Locations (3)

Thomas J. Stephens & Associates; 🇺🇸 Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States

TKL Research, Inc.; 🇺🇸 Ramsey, New Jersey, United States

TKL Research, Inc; 🇺🇸 Paramus, New Jersey, United States