PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Colley, Jack
AU  - Dambha-Miller, Hajira
AU  - Stuart, Beth
AU  - Bartholomew, Jazz
AU  - Price, Hermione
TI  - Home monitoring of HbA1c in diabetes mellitus: A protocol for systematic review and narrative synthesis on reliability, accuracy, and patient acceptability
AID  - 10.1101/2021.12.15.21267851
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.12.15.21267851
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/15/2021.12.15.21267851.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/15/2021.12.15.21267851.full
AB  - Introduction Worldwide there are an estimated 463 million people with diabetes. [1] In the UK people with diabetes are offered an annual review including monitoring of Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). [2] [3] This can identify people with diabetes who are not meeting their glycaemic targets, enabling early intervention. Those who do not attend these reviews often have higher HbA1c levels and poorer health outcomes. [4] During the Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a 77% reduction in monitoring of HbA1c in the UK. [5] We hypothesise that people with diabetes could take finger-prick samples at home for the measurement of HbA1c.Method and Analysis We will perform a systematic review of current evidence for capillary blood collected at home for the measurement of HbA1c. We will examine the validity, reliability, safety, and patient acceptability of the use of capillary blood compared with the usual standard of care of venous blood. We will explore variables which affect validity of results. Using core terms of ‘Diabetes’, ‘HbA1c’ and ‘Capillary sampling’ we will search MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, Open Grey and other grey literature from database inception until 2021. Risk of bias will be assessed using the ‘COSMIN risk of bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error’. Database searches and data extraction for primary outcomes will be conducted in duplicate. We will produce a narrative synthesis exploring how variables of capillary blood collection impact on validity, as well as exploring the safety and acceptability of patient self-collection.Ethics and Dissemination This review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed open-access journal. We will present our results at both national and international conferences. As a systematic review with no primary participant data or involvement, ethical approval is not applicable.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021225606Strengths and limitations of this studyTo our knowledge this is the first systematic review to explore all postal methods of capillary blood collection for the measurement of HbA1c.This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, which offers transparency and enhances reproducibility.Due to anticipated heterogeneity in statistical approaches, summary analyses, sample storage, transportation, extraction, and assay, meta-analysis is unlikely to be appropriate and therefore narrative synthesis will be used.Due to the exclusion criteria, our findings may not be generalisable to a wider population including children, and those with haemoglobinopathies, high erythrocyte turnover or other conditions likely to affect HbA1c result.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe funder and sponsor is Southern Health Foundation Trust. The lead author holds a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) clinical fellowship. The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) or the Department of Health and Social Care.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors