Study on glucose fluctuations to be presented in Milan — ScienceDaily

In Milan, Italy, at the annual meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, researchers will present a study that found a link between spending more time in the normal glucose range and better quality of life the following day. At the same time, among some people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, greater-than-usual glucose variability was also associated with a higher well-being score the next day, ScienceDaily reports.

Data from 400 participants

The analysis was conducted by Professor Dominic Ehrmann of the Diabetes Academy Mergentheim Research Institute in Bad Mergentheim, Germany, and his colleagues. They used data from the PRO-MENTAL study, funded by the German Center for Diabetes Research.

The study involved 400 people with diabetes: 72% had type 1 diabetes, 28% had type 2 diabetes, and 55% of participants were women. The average age was 47 years, while the average glycated hemoglobin HbA1c level was 7.6%.

For 14 days, participants used continuous glucose monitoring systems and assessed their own quality of life daily. For this, researchers used the ecological momentary assessment method based on the WHO-5 questionnaire, which covers mood, calmness, activity, feeling rested after sleep, and interest in everyday life.

More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.

Link with well-being

Scientists analyzed whether glucose indicators, sleep, stress levels, mood, and energy on one day could be related to quality of life the following day. The models accounted for age, sex, type of diabetes, and the previous quality-of-life score.

A greater proportion of time in the normal glucose range, from 70 to 140 mg/dL, was statistically associated with better quality of life the following day. Greater glucose variability, better sleep, and higher energy levels on the previous day were also associated with a higher well-being score the next day.

At the same time, time spent with glucose levels above or below the safe range had no statistically significant association with quality of life the following day. Glucose indicators from the same day were also not associated with the quality-of-life score on that day.

The authors emphasized that the results do not mean that poor glucose control is beneficial. In their view, the link between greater variability and better well-being may indicate the burden of restrictions that some people follow while trying to reduce usual blood sugar fluctuations as much as possible.