ObjectiveThis study assesses the effectiveness of different interventions of knowledge transfer and behaviour modification to improve type 2 diabetes mellitus patients’ (T2DM) reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in the long-term. Design: open, community-based pragmatic, multicentre, controlled trial with random allocation by clusters to usual care (UC) or to one of the three interventions.ParticipantsA total of 2334 patients with uncomplicated T2DM and 211 healthcare professionals were included of 32 primary care centres.SettingPrimary Care Centers in Canary Islands (Spain).InterventionThe intervention for patients (PTI) included an educational group programme, logs and a web-based platform for monitoring and automated short message service (SMS). The intervention for professionals (PFI) included an educational programme, a decision support tool embedded into the electronic clinical record and periodic feedback about patients’ results. A third group received both PTI and PFI (combined intervention, CBI).Outcome measureCognitive-attitudinal, behavioural, affective and health-related quality of life (HQoL) variables.ResultsCompared with UC at 24 months, the PTI group significantly improved knowledge (p=0.005), self-empowerment (p=0.002), adherence to dietary recommendations (p<0.001) and distress (p=0.01). The PFI group improved at 24 months in distress (p=0.03) and at 12 months there were improvements in depression (p=0.003), anxiety (p=0.05), HQoL (p=0.005) and self-empowerment (p<0.001). The CBI group improved at 24 months in self-empowerment (p=0.008) and adherence to dietary recommendations (p=0.004) and at 12 months in knowledge (p=0.008), depression (p=0.006), anxiety (p=0.003), distress (p=0.01), HQoL (p<0.001) and neuropathic symptoms (p=0.02). Statistically significant improvements were also observed at 24 months in the proportion of patients who quit smoking for PTI and CBI (41.5% in PTI and 42.3% in CBI vs 21.2% in the UC group).ConclusionsAssessed interventions to improve PROMs in T2DM attain effectiveness for knowledge, self-empowerment, distress, diet adherence and tobacco cessation. PTI produced the most lasting benefits.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov NCT01657227 (6 August 2012) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01657227.
Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic disease in which health outcomes are related to decision making by patients and health care professionals. Objective This study aims to assess the effectiveness of internet-based multicomponent interventions to support decision making of all actors involved in the care of patients with T2DM in primary care. Methods The INDICA study is an open, community-based, multicenter trial with random allocation to usual care or the intervention for patients, the intervention for health care professionals in primary care, or the combined intervention for both. In the intervention for patients, participants received an educational group program and were monitored and supported by logs, a web-based platform, and automated SMS. Those in the intervention for professionals also received an educational program, a decision support tool embedded in the electronic clinical record, and periodic feedback about patients’ results. A total of 2334 people with T2DM, regardless of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and without diabetes-related complications, were included. The primary end point was change in HbA1c level. The main analysis was performed using multilevel mixed models. Results For the overall sample, the intervention for patients attained a significant mean reduction in HbA1c levels of ‒0.27 (95% CI ‒0.45 to ‒0.10) at month 3 and ‒0.26 (95% CI ‒0.44 to ‒0.08) at month 6 compared with usual care, which remained marginally significant at month 12. A clinically relevant reduction in HbA1c level was observed in 35.6% (191/537) of patients in the intervention for patients and 26.0% (152/586) of those in usual care at month 12 (P=.006). In the combined intervention, HbA1c reduction was significant until month 18 (181/557, 32.6% vs 140/586, 23.9%; P=.009). Considering the subgroup of patients uncontrolled at baseline, all interventions produced significant reductions in HbA1c levels across the entire study period: ‒0.49 (95% CI ‒0.70 to ‒0.27) for the intervention for patients, ‒0.35 (95% CI ‒0.59 to ‒0.14) for the intervention for professionals, and ‒0.35 (95% CI ‒0.57 to ‒0.13) for the combined intervention. Differences in HbA1c for the area under the curve considering the entire period were significant for the intervention for patients and the combined intervention compared with usual care (P=.03 for both). Compared with usual care, the intervention for professionals and the combined intervention had significant longer-term reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Conclusions In uncontrolled patients, the intervention for patients at baseline provided clinically relevant and significant longer-term reductions of HbA1c levels. The intervention for professionals and combined intervention also improved the cardiovascular risk profile of patients. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01657227; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01657227
Introduction. In cross-sectional analyses, higher levels of patient empowerment have been related to lower symptoms of anxiety and depression. The aims of this study are: (1) to assess if patient empowerment predicts anxiety and depression symptoms after 12 and 24 months among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and (2) to analyze whether a change in patient empowerment is associated with a change in anxiety and depression level. Methods. This is a secondary analysis of the INDICA study, a 24 month-long, multi-arm randomized controlled trial. Patient empowerment (DES-SF), depression (BDI-II), and state-anxiety (STAI-S) were assessed at the baseline (pre-intervention) and after 12 and 24 months. Multilevel mixed linear models with a random intercept were performed to correct for our clustered data. Results. The multilevel regression models showed that the baseline empowerment did not significantly predict anxiety and depression after 12 and 24 months. However, a higher increase in patient empowerment was significantly associated with reductions of anxiety (p < 0.001) and depression levels (p < 0.001). This association was not significantly different between the two follow-ups. Conclusion. This study contributes to the knowledge on how to reduce affective symptoms in patients with uncomplicated T2DM through comprehensive patient-centered interventions, and it highlights patient empowerment as a significant contributor.
The Monitoring Studies (MS) program, the approach developed by RedETS to generate postlaunch real-world evidence (RWE), is intended to complement and enhance the conventional health technology assessment process to support health policy decision making in Spain, besides informing other interested stakeholders, including clinicians and patients. The MS program is focused on specific uncertainties about the real effect, safety, costs, and routine use of new and insufficiently assessed relevant medical devices carefully selected to ensure the value of the additional research needed, by means of structured, controlled, participative, and transparent procedures. However, despite a clear political commitment and economic support from national and regional health authorities, several difficulties were identified along the development and implementation of the first wave of MS, delaying its execution and final reporting. Resolution of these difficulties at the regional and national levels and a greater collaborative impulse in the European Union, given the availability of an appropriate methodological framework already provided by EUnetHTA, might provide a faster and more efficient comparative RWE of improved quality and reliability at the national and international levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.