Cargando…

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial

INTRODUCTION: Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ried-Larsen, Mathias, Christensen, Robin, Hansen, Katrine B, Johansen, Mette Y, Pedersen, Maria, Zacho, Morten, Hansen, Louise S, Kofoed, Katja, Thomsen, Katja, Jensen, Mette S, Nielsen, Rasmus O, MacDonald, Chris, Langberg, Henning, Vaag, Allan A, Pedersen, Bente K, Karstoft, Kristian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4679918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26656025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009764
_version_ 1782405609201598464
author Ried-Larsen, Mathias
Christensen, Robin
Hansen, Katrine B
Johansen, Mette Y
Pedersen, Maria
Zacho, Morten
Hansen, Louise S
Kofoed, Katja
Thomsen, Katja
Jensen, Mette S
Nielsen, Rasmus O
MacDonald, Chris
Langberg, Henning
Vaag, Allan A
Pedersen, Bente K
Karstoft, Kristian
author_facet Ried-Larsen, Mathias
Christensen, Robin
Hansen, Katrine B
Johansen, Mette Y
Pedersen, Maria
Zacho, Morten
Hansen, Louise S
Kofoed, Katja
Thomsen, Katja
Jensen, Mette S
Nielsen, Rasmus O
MacDonald, Chris
Langberg, Henning
Vaag, Allan A
Pedersen, Bente K
Karstoft, Kristian
author_sort Ried-Larsen, Mathias
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the optimal intervention programmes in T2D ensuring both compliance as well as long-term health outcomes. Our objective is to assess the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (the U-TURN intervention) on glycaemic control in patients with T2D. Our hypothesis is that intensive lifestyle changes are equally effective as standard diabetes care, including pharmacological treatment in maintaining glycaemic control (ie, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)) in patients with T2D. Furthermore, we expect that intensive lifestyle changes will decrease the need for antidiabetic medications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is an assessor-blinded, parallel group and a 1-year randomised trial. The primary outcome is change in glycaemic control (HbA1c), with the key secondary outcome being reductions in antidiabetic medication. Participants will be patients with T2D (T2D duration <10 years) without complications who are randomised into an intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) or a standard care intervention in a 2:1 fashion. Both groups will be exposed to the same standardised, blinded, target-driven pharmacological treatment and can thus maintain, increase, reduce or discontinue the pharmacological treatment. The decision is based on the standardised algorithm. The U-TURN intervention consists of increased training and basal physical activity level, and an antidiabetic diet including an intended weight loss. The standard care group as well as the U-TURN group is offered individual diabetes management counselling on top of the pharmacological treatment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee at the Capital Region of Denmark (H-1–2014–114). Positive, negative or inconclusive findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02417012.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4679918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46799182015-12-22 Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial Ried-Larsen, Mathias Christensen, Robin Hansen, Katrine B Johansen, Mette Y Pedersen, Maria Zacho, Morten Hansen, Louise S Kofoed, Katja Thomsen, Katja Jensen, Mette S Nielsen, Rasmus O MacDonald, Chris Langberg, Henning Vaag, Allan A Pedersen, Bente K Karstoft, Kristian BMJ Open Diabetes and Endocrinology INTRODUCTION: Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the optimal intervention programmes in T2D ensuring both compliance as well as long-term health outcomes. Our objective is to assess the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (the U-TURN intervention) on glycaemic control in patients with T2D. Our hypothesis is that intensive lifestyle changes are equally effective as standard diabetes care, including pharmacological treatment in maintaining glycaemic control (ie, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)) in patients with T2D. Furthermore, we expect that intensive lifestyle changes will decrease the need for antidiabetic medications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is an assessor-blinded, parallel group and a 1-year randomised trial. The primary outcome is change in glycaemic control (HbA1c), with the key secondary outcome being reductions in antidiabetic medication. Participants will be patients with T2D (T2D duration <10 years) without complications who are randomised into an intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) or a standard care intervention in a 2:1 fashion. Both groups will be exposed to the same standardised, blinded, target-driven pharmacological treatment and can thus maintain, increase, reduce or discontinue the pharmacological treatment. The decision is based on the standardised algorithm. The U-TURN intervention consists of increased training and basal physical activity level, and an antidiabetic diet including an intended weight loss. The standard care group as well as the U-TURN group is offered individual diabetes management counselling on top of the pharmacological treatment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee at the Capital Region of Denmark (H-1–2014–114). Positive, negative or inconclusive findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02417012. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4679918/ /pubmed/26656025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009764 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Diabetes and Endocrinology
Ried-Larsen, Mathias
Christensen, Robin
Hansen, Katrine B
Johansen, Mette Y
Pedersen, Maria
Zacho, Morten
Hansen, Louise S
Kofoed, Katja
Thomsen, Katja
Jensen, Mette S
Nielsen, Rasmus O
MacDonald, Chris
Langberg, Henning
Vaag, Allan A
Pedersen, Bente K
Karstoft, Kristian
Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title_full Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title_fullStr Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title_full_unstemmed Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title_short Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
title_sort head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (u-turn) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial
topic Diabetes and Endocrinology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4679918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26656025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009764
work_keys_str_mv AT riedlarsenmathias headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT christensenrobin headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT hansenkatrineb headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT johansenmettey headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT pedersenmaria headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT zachomorten headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT hansenlouises headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT kofoedkatja headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT thomsenkatja headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT jensenmettes headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT nielsenrasmuso headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT macdonaldchris headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT langberghenning headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT vaagallana headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT pedersenbentek headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial
AT karstoftkristian headtoheadcomparisonofintensivelifestyleinterventionuturnversusconventionalmultifactorialcareinpatientswithtype2diabetesprotocolandrationaleforanassessorblindedparallelgroupandrandomisedtrial