Cargando…

Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial

Aim. Testing the effectiveness of peer support additionally to a disease management programme (DMP) for type 2 diabetes patients. Methods. Unblinded cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving 49 general practices, province of Salzburg, Austria. All patients enrolled in the DMP were eligible...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johansson, Tim, Keller, Sophie, Winkler, Henrike, Ostermann, Thomas, Weitgasser, Raimund, Sönnichsen, Andreas C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4698561/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26858958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3248547
_version_ 1782408046690959360
author Johansson, Tim
Keller, Sophie
Winkler, Henrike
Ostermann, Thomas
Weitgasser, Raimund
Sönnichsen, Andreas C.
author_facet Johansson, Tim
Keller, Sophie
Winkler, Henrike
Ostermann, Thomas
Weitgasser, Raimund
Sönnichsen, Andreas C.
author_sort Johansson, Tim
collection PubMed
description Aim. Testing the effectiveness of peer support additionally to a disease management programme (DMP) for type 2 diabetes patients. Methods. Unblinded cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving 49 general practices, province of Salzburg, Austria. All patients enrolled in the DMP were eligible, n = 337 participated (intervention: 148 in 19 clusters; control: 189 in 20 clusters). The peer support intervention ran over 24 months and consisted of peer supporter recruitment and training, and group meetings weekly for physical exercise and monthly for discussion of diabetes related topics. Results. At two-year follow-up, adjusted analysis revealed a nonsignificant difference in HbA(1c) change of 0.14% (21.97 mmol/mol) in favour of the intervention (95% CI −0.08 to 0.36%, p = 0.22). Baseline values were 7.02 ± 1.25% in the intervention and 7.08 ± 1.25 in the control group. None of the secondary outcome measures showed significant differences except for improved quality of life (EQ-5D-VAS) in controls (4.3 points on a scale of 100; 95% CI 0.08 to 8.53, p = 0.046) compared to the intervention group. Conclusion. Our peer support intervention as an additional DMP component showed no significant effect on HbA(1c) and secondary outcome measures. Further RTCs with a longer follow-up are needed to reveal whether peer support will have clinically relevant effects. Trial Registration. This trial has been registered with Current Controlled Trials Ltd. (ISRCTN10291077).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4698561
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46985612016-02-08 Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial Johansson, Tim Keller, Sophie Winkler, Henrike Ostermann, Thomas Weitgasser, Raimund Sönnichsen, Andreas C. J Diabetes Res Clinical Study Aim. Testing the effectiveness of peer support additionally to a disease management programme (DMP) for type 2 diabetes patients. Methods. Unblinded cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving 49 general practices, province of Salzburg, Austria. All patients enrolled in the DMP were eligible, n = 337 participated (intervention: 148 in 19 clusters; control: 189 in 20 clusters). The peer support intervention ran over 24 months and consisted of peer supporter recruitment and training, and group meetings weekly for physical exercise and monthly for discussion of diabetes related topics. Results. At two-year follow-up, adjusted analysis revealed a nonsignificant difference in HbA(1c) change of 0.14% (21.97 mmol/mol) in favour of the intervention (95% CI −0.08 to 0.36%, p = 0.22). Baseline values were 7.02 ± 1.25% in the intervention and 7.08 ± 1.25 in the control group. None of the secondary outcome measures showed significant differences except for improved quality of life (EQ-5D-VAS) in controls (4.3 points on a scale of 100; 95% CI 0.08 to 8.53, p = 0.046) compared to the intervention group. Conclusion. Our peer support intervention as an additional DMP component showed no significant effect on HbA(1c) and secondary outcome measures. Further RTCs with a longer follow-up are needed to reveal whether peer support will have clinically relevant effects. Trial Registration. This trial has been registered with Current Controlled Trials Ltd. (ISRCTN10291077). Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2015-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4698561/ /pubmed/26858958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3248547 Text en Copyright © 2016 Tim Johansson et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Johansson, Tim
Keller, Sophie
Winkler, Henrike
Ostermann, Thomas
Weitgasser, Raimund
Sönnichsen, Andreas C.
Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title_full Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title_short Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial
title_sort effectiveness of a peer support programme versus usual care in disease management of diabetes mellitus type 2 regarding improvement of metabolic control: a cluster-randomised controlled trial
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4698561/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26858958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3248547
work_keys_str_mv AT johanssontim effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kellersophie effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT winklerhenrike effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ostermannthomas effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT weitgasserraimund effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT sonnichsenandreasc effectivenessofapeersupportprogrammeversususualcareindiseasemanagementofdiabetesmellitustype2regardingimprovementofmetaboliccontrolaclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial