Results for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes were examined separately. Study variability and poor reporting made comparison difficult, and most studies had important methodological weaknesses. Evidence on the effectiveness of mhealth interventions for diabetes was inconsistent for both types of diabetes and remains weak.

BackgroundThe American Behaviour Change Consortium (BCC) framework acknowledges patients as active participants and supports the need to investigate the fidelity with which they receive interventions, i.e. receipt. According to this framework, addressing receipt consists in using strategies to assess or enhance participants’ understanding and/or performance of intervention skills. This systematic review aims to establish the frequency with which receipt is addressed as defined in the BCC framework in health research, and to describe the methods used in papers informed by the BCC framework and in the wider literature.MethodsA forward citation search on papers presenting the BCC framework was performed to determine the frequency with which receipt as defined in this framework was addressed. A second electronic database search, including search terms pertaining to fidelity, receipt, health and process evaluations was performed to identify papers reporting on receipt in the wider literature and irrespective of the framework used. These results were combined with forward citation search results to review methods to assess receipt. Eligibility criteria and data extraction forms were developed and applied to papers. Results are described in a narrative synthesis.Results19.6% of 33 studies identified from the forward citation search to report on fidelity were found to address receipt. In 60.6% of these, receipt was assessed in relation to understanding and in 42.4% in relation to performance of skill. Strategies to enhance these were present in 12.1% and 21.1% of studies, respectively. Fifty-five studies were included in the review of the wider literature. Several frameworks and operationalisations of receipt were reported, but the latter were not always consistent with the guiding framework. Receipt was most frequently operationalised in relation to intervention content (16.4%), satisfaction (14.5%), engagement (14.5%), and attendance (14.5%). The majority of studies (90.0%) included subjective assessments of receipt. These relied on quantitative (76.0%) rather than qualitative (42.0%) methods and studies collected data on intervention recipients (50.0%), intervention deliverers (28.0%), or both (22.0%). Few studies (26.0%) reported on the reliability or validity of methods used.ConclusionsReceipt is infrequently addressed in health research and improvements to methods of assessment and reporting are required.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1904-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Covert HE was associated with impaired HRQoL and sleep quality. MHE and HE1 affected both outcomes to a comparable extent supporting the use of CHE as a clinically useful term for patients with both entities of HE in clinical practice.

No abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. The objective of this research is to determine the effects of mobile telehealth (MTH) on glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and other clinical and patient-reported outcomes in insulin-requiring people with diabetes. Permanent repository link MethodsA nine-month randomised, controlled trial compared standard care to standard care supplemented with MTH (self-monitoring, mobile-phone data transmissions, graphical and nurse-initiated feedback, and educational calls). Clinical (HbA1c, blood pressure, daily insulin dose, diabetes outpatient appointments (DOAs)) and questionnaire data (health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety) were collected. Mean group changes over time were compared using hierarchical linear models and MannWhitney tests. ResultsEighty-one participants with a baseline HbA1c of 8.98% ± 1.82 were randomised to the intervention (n = 45) and standard care (n = 36). The Group by Time effect revealed MTH did not significantly influence HbA1c (p = 0.228), but p values were borderline significant for blood pressure (p = 0.054) and mental-health related quality of life (p = 0.057). Examination of effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals for mean group differences at nine months supported the existence of a protective effect of MTH on mental health-related quality of life as well as depression. None of the other measured outcomes were found to be affected by the MTH intervention. ConclusionsFindings from this study must be interpreted with caution given the small sample size, but they do not support the widespread adoption of MTH to achieve clinically significant changes in HbA1c. MTH may, however, have positive effects on blood pressure and protective effects on some aspects of mental health.

Introduction: Evidence supporting home telehealth effects on clinical outcomes in diabetes is available, yet mechanisms of action for these improvements remain poorly understood. Behavioural change is one plausible explanation. This study investigated the behavioural effects of a mobile-phone based home telehealth (MTH) intervention in people with diabetes. It was hypothesized that MTH would improve self-efficacy, illness beliefs, and diabetes self-care. Methods: A randomized controlled trial compared standard care to standard care supplemented with MTH (self-monitoring, data transmission, graphical and nurse-initiated feedback, educational calls). Self-report measures of self-efficacy, illness beliefs, and self-care were repeated at baseline, three months, and nine months. MTH effects were based on the group by time interactions in hierarchical linear models and effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Interviews with MTH participants explored the perceived effects of MTH on diabetes self-management. Results: Eighty-one participants were randomized to the intervention (n ¼ 45) and standard care (n ¼ 36). Significant group by time effects were observed for five out of seven self-efficacy subscales. Effect sizes were large, particularly at nine months. Interaction effects for illness beliefs and self-care were non-significant, but effect sizes and confidence intervals suggested MTH may positively affect diet and exercise. In interviews, MTH was associated with increased awareness, motivation, and a greater sense of security. Improved self-monitoring and diet were reported by some participants. Discussion: MTH empowers people with diabetes to manage their condition and may influence self-care. Future MTH research would benefit from investigating behavioural mechanisms and determining patient profiles predictive of greater behavioural effectiveness.

This study identified several potential target areas for future interventions from nine of the TDF behavioural domains that anesthesiologists perceive to drive their temperature management practices. Future interventions that aim to close the evidence-practice gap in perioperative temperature management may include these targets.

The current article presents data on the influence of contextual factors on the conduct of this MTH study and underlines the need for these processes to be assessed and reported adequately in future MTH research.