Indicadores de Avaliação de Programas Domiciliares de Monitoramento Glicêmico para Diabetes Tipo 2: Revisão Integrativa da Literatura

Camila Ravagnani Rodrigues Bueno; Maria do Carmo Fernandez Lourenço Haddad; Lucimara de Souza Cogo; Patricia Aroni Dadalt; Maynara Fernanda Carvalho Barreto

doi:10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v16i98p16668-16676

Autores/as

Camila Ravagnani Rodrigues Bueno Universidade Estadual de Londrina; Londrina; Paraná; Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8020-4243
Maria do Carmo Fernandez Lourenço Haddad Universidade Estadual de Londrina; Londrina; Paraná; Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7564-8563
Lucimara de Souza Cogo Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná; Bandeirantes; Paraná; Brasil. https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1656-143X
Patricia Aroni Dadalt Universidade Estadual de Londrina; Londrina; PR; Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5092-2714
Maynara Fernanda Carvalho Barreto Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná; Bandeirantes; Paraná; Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3562-8477

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v16i98p16668-16676

Palabras clave:

Diabetes Mellitus, Control Glucémico, Evaluación em Salud, Programa, Indicadores de Gestión

Resumen

Objetivo: Analizar la producción científica sobre los indicadores de evaluación de los programas de vigilancia glucémica domiciliaria para personas con diabetes mellitus tipo 2. Métodos: Revisión integrativa de la literatura, guiada por la pregunta de investigación: ¿Cuál es la evidencia científica publicada sobre los indicadores de vigilancia glucémica domiciliaria? Luego de definir el problema mediante la estrategia PICO, se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos “Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL y Web of Science”. Los criterios de elegibilidad fueron: estudios publicados que respondieran a la pregunta de investigación, sin delimitación de idioma y año de publicación. Resultados: Se seleccionaron ocho artículos, con predominio de ensayos clínicos, refierentes a programas de autocontrol glucémico domiciliario, seguidos de un estudio que evalúa actividades educativas y educativas con componente de control glucémico. El principal indicador de calidad para evaluar los programas fue la tasa de hemoglobina glicosilada. Otro indicador de evaluación fue la opinión de los pacientes y profesionales implicados en la intervención. Consideraciones finales: Los estudios han demostrado que los programas de autocontrol glucémico, asociados a actividades de educación para la salud, son efectivos en el tratamiento y control de la diabetes mellitus.

Citas

Sociedade Brasileira de Diabetes. [Official positioning nº03/2020. Therapeutic conduct in people with diabetes and hypertension] [Internet]. São Paulo – SP. 2020 [cited 16 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://profissional.diabetes.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CONDUTA-TERAPEUTICA-HIPERTENSAO-ARTERIAL.pdf

Pan American Health Organization. Panorama of Diabetes in the Americas [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: PAHO; 2022. Available from: https://doi.org/10.37774/9789275126332.

International Diabetes Federation. More than two in three people with diabetes already have complications at diagnosis [Internet]. Available from: https://idf.org/news/more-than-two-in-three-people-with-diabetes-already-have-complications-at-diagnosis/

Souza VP, Santos ECB, Angelim RCM, Teixeira CRS, Martins RD. Conhecimento e Práticas de Usuários com Diabetes Mellitus sobre a Automonitorização da Glicemia Capilar no Domicílio. Revista de Pesquisa Cuidado é Fundamental Online. 2018;10(3):737–745.

Rankings, SI. A avaliação de programas de saúde: continuidades e mudanças. Cad. Saúde Pública. 2020; 36(9):e00237219, p. 1-8.

Ganong LH. Integrative reviews of nursing research. Res Nurs Health. 1987;10(1):1-11.

Mendes KDS, Silveira RCCP, Galvão CM. Integrative literature review: a research method to incorporate evidence in health care and nursing. Texto contexto - enferm. 2008;17(4):758-64.

Tanaka N, Yabe D, Murotani K, Yamaguchi Y, Fujita Y, Kubota S, et al. Effects of physician's diabetes self-management education using Japan Association of Diabetes Education and Care Diabetes Education Card System Program and a self-monitoring of blood glucose readings analyzer in individuals with type 2 diabetes: An exploratory, open-labeled, prospective randomized clinical trial. J Diabetes Investig. 2021;12(12):2221-2231.

Wambui Charity K, Kumar AMV, Hinderaker SG, Chinnakali P, Pastakia SD, Kamano J. Do diabetes mellitus patients adhere to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and is this associated with glycemic control? Experiences from a SMBG program in western Kenya. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;112:37-43.

Augusto MC, Nitsche MJT, Parada CMGL, Zanetti ML, Carvalhaes MABL. Avaliação do Programa de Automonitoramento da Glicemia Capilar. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2014, 22(5), 801-809.

Williams ED, Bird D, Forbes AW, Russell A, Ash S, Friedman R, Scuffham PA, Oldenburg B. Randomised controlled trial of an automated, interactive telephone intervention (TLC Diabetes) to improve type 2 diabetes management: baseline findings and six-month outcomes. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:602.

Ravagnani C, Maria, Costa K, Danielly, Cristina I, Carvalho F. Avaliação do custo, eficácia e satisfação dos atores de programa de monitorização glicêmica domiciliar. Revista Enfermagem Atual In Derme. 2023 Sep 29;97(3): e023147–7.

Santos, Goelzer V, Beatriz Dias Paredes, Carla A, Kristian Cavalcanti Santos, Lorenzato S, et al. O impacto do uso de dispositivos de monitoramento contínuo de glicose no controle glicêmico e na qualidade de vida de pessoas vivendo com diabetes tipo 2. Revista Eletrônica Acervo Saúde. 2023 Dec 20;23(12):e15090–0.

Nunes LB, Santos JC dos, Reis IA, Torres H de C. Avaliação do programa comportamental em diabetes mellitus tipo 2: ensaio clínico randomizado. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva [Internet]. 2023 Mar 6 [cited 2023 Mar 15];28:851–62. Available from: https://www.scielo.br/j/csc/a/qSHtDpxYfqB6fgFsfjcFpVQ/?lang=pt.

Diabetes control and complications trial research group, Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, Cleary P, Crofford O, et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;14(329):977-86.

United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) 13: relative efficacy of randomly allocated diet, sulphonylurea, insulin, or metformin in patients with newly diagnosed non-insulin dependent diabetes followed for three years. BMJ. 1995;310(6972):83-8.

Tauschmann M, Hovorka R. Technology in the management of type 1 diabetes mellitus - current status and future prospects. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2018;14(8):464-75.

Ferreira CM, Soares EP, Carvalho GB. Educational intervention as a management tool for diabetics. Cad Esp Ceará. 2020;1(14):111-114.

Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, Rosenblit PD, Umpierrez GE, Davidson MH. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists' Comprehensive Diabetes Management Algorithm 2013 Consensus Statement-executive summary. Endocr Pract. 2013;19:1-48.

Donabedian A. The role of outcomes in quality assessment and assurance. Quality Review Bulletin. 1992;6(20):975-992.

Ricci NA, Wanderly FS, Oliveira MS, Rebelatto JR. The São Carlos Hospital School: assessment of its functioning by means of user satisfaction. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2011;16(1):1125-1134.

Volpato LF, Meneghim MC, Pereira AC, Ambrosano GMB. Quality planning of Family Health Units using Quality Function Deployment (QFD). Cad Saúde Pública. 2010;8(26):1561-1572.

Houlihan B, Jette A, Friedman R, Paasche-Orlow M, Ni P, Wierbicky J, et al. A pilot study of a telehealth intervention for persons with spinal cord dysfunction. Spinal Cord. 2013;51:715-720.

Eakin EG, Lawler SP, Vandelanotte C, Owen N. Telephone interventions for physical activity and dietary behavior change: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32:419-434.