Cargando…
Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial
BACKGROUND: Does an intervention designed to foster patient-centered communication and shared decision making among GPs and their patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus reduce the level of HbA1c. METHODS: The DEBATE trial is a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in German...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593484/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31238871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-0977-9 |
_version_ | 1783430056635269120 |
---|---|
author | Wollny, Anja Altiner, Attila Daubmann, Anne Drewelow, Eva Helbig, Christian Löscher, Susanne Pentzek, Michael Santos, Sara Wegscheider, Karl Wilm, Stefan Löffler, Christin |
author_facet | Wollny, Anja Altiner, Attila Daubmann, Anne Drewelow, Eva Helbig, Christian Löscher, Susanne Pentzek, Michael Santos, Sara Wegscheider, Karl Wilm, Stefan Löffler, Christin |
author_sort | Wollny, Anja |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Does an intervention designed to foster patient-centered communication and shared decision making among GPs and their patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus reduce the level of HbA1c. METHODS: The DEBATE trial is a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in German primary care and including patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus having an HbA1c level of 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) or above at the time of recruitment. Data was measured before intervention (baseline, T0), 6–8 months (T1), 12–14 months (T2), 18–20 months (T3), and 24–26 months (T4) after baseline. Main outcome measure is the level of HbA1c. RESULTS: In both, the intervention and the control group the decline of the HbA1c level from T0 to T4 was statistically significant (− 0.67% (95% CI: − 0.80,-0.54%; p < 0.0001) and − 0.64% (95% CI: − 0.78, − 0.51%; p < 0.0001), respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although the DEBATE trial was not able to confirm effectiveness of the intervention tested compared to care as usual, the results suggest that patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes are able to improve their blood glucose levels. This finding may encourage physicians to stay on task to regularly approach this cohort of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0977-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6593484 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65934842019-07-09 Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial Wollny, Anja Altiner, Attila Daubmann, Anne Drewelow, Eva Helbig, Christian Löscher, Susanne Pentzek, Michael Santos, Sara Wegscheider, Karl Wilm, Stefan Löffler, Christin BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Does an intervention designed to foster patient-centered communication and shared decision making among GPs and their patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus reduce the level of HbA1c. METHODS: The DEBATE trial is a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in German primary care and including patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus having an HbA1c level of 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) or above at the time of recruitment. Data was measured before intervention (baseline, T0), 6–8 months (T1), 12–14 months (T2), 18–20 months (T3), and 24–26 months (T4) after baseline. Main outcome measure is the level of HbA1c. RESULTS: In both, the intervention and the control group the decline of the HbA1c level from T0 to T4 was statistically significant (− 0.67% (95% CI: − 0.80,-0.54%; p < 0.0001) and − 0.64% (95% CI: − 0.78, − 0.51%; p < 0.0001), respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although the DEBATE trial was not able to confirm effectiveness of the intervention tested compared to care as usual, the results suggest that patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes are able to improve their blood glucose levels. This finding may encourage physicians to stay on task to regularly approach this cohort of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0977-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6593484/ /pubmed/31238871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-0977-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wollny, Anja Altiner, Attila Daubmann, Anne Drewelow, Eva Helbig, Christian Löscher, Susanne Pentzek, Michael Santos, Sara Wegscheider, Karl Wilm, Stefan Löffler, Christin Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title | Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title_full | Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title_fullStr | Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title_short | Patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce HbA1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial |
title_sort | patient-centered communication and shared decision making to reduce hba1c levels of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus - results of the cluster-randomized controlled debate trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593484/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31238871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-0977-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wollnyanja patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT altinerattila patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT daubmannanne patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT dreweloweva patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT helbigchristian patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT loschersusanne patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT pentzekmichael patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT santossara patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT wegscheiderkarl patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT wilmstefan patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial AT lofflerchristin patientcenteredcommunicationandshareddecisionmakingtoreducehba1clevelsofpatientswithpoorlycontrolledtype2diabetesmellitusresultsoftheclusterrandomizedcontrolleddebatetrial |