21 research outputs found
Secondary outcomes in those retaining compared to standard care and retainers versus nonretainers.
<p>Coefficients show the mean effect of the intervention compared to standard care adjusted for baseline value and cluster. Adjusted columns are additionally adjusted for age, sex, deprivation score, smoking status, and BMI.</p
Comparison of baseline characteristics of those who retain (defined as attending all education sessions) versus nonretainers.
<p>Data are given as mean (SD) unless otherwise stated. The odds ratio gives the odds associated with being a retainer compared to a nonretainer, 95% CI adjusted for clustering.</p
Fruit and vegetable intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the independent effects of intake of fruit and vegetables on incidence of type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, British Nursing Index (BNI), and the Cochrane library were searched for medical subject headings and keywords on diabetes, prediabetes, fruit, and vegetables. Expert opinions were sought and reference lists of relevant articles checked. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective cohort studies with an independent measure of intake of fruit, vegetables, or fruit and vegetables and data on incidence of type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria; four of these studies also provided separate information on the consumption of green leafy vegetables. Summary estimates showed that greater intake of green leafy vegetables was associated with a 14% (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.97) reduction in risk of type 2 diabetes (P=0.01). The summary estimates showed no significant benefits of increasing the consumption of vegetables, fruit, or fruit and vegetables combined. CONCLUSION: Increasing daily intake of green leafy vegetables could significantly reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes and should be investigated further
Comparison of baseline characteristics of those who engage versus nonengagers (defined as attending the first education session).
<p>Data are given as mean (standard deviation [SD]) unless otherwise stated. The odds ratio gives the odds associated with being an engager compared to a nonengager, 95% CI adjusted for clustering.</p
Comparison of T2DM events and incidence rates across groups.
<p>Comparison of T2DM events and incidence rates across groups.</p
Incidence of type 2 diabetes by attendance.
<p>HR (95% CI) takes into account clustering, and the adjusted models include age, sex, deprivation score, smoking status, and BMI. Engagers: attended the initial education session; retainers: attended all education sessions; plus min one: attended the initial education plus a minimum of one refresher session; * these are not mutually exclusive groups.</p
Engagement, Retention, and Progression to Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Analysis of the Cluster-Randomised "Let's Prevent Diabetes" Trial
Background:
Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a global priority. Letโs Prevent Diabetes is a group-based diabetes prevention programme; it was evaluated in a cluster-randomised trial, in which the primary analysis showed a reduction in T2DM (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% CI 0.48โ1.14, p = 0.18). We examined the association of engagement and retention with the Letโs Prevent Diabetes prevention programme and T2DM incidence.
Methods and Findings:
We used data from a completed cluster-randomised controlled trial including 43 general practices randomised to receive either standard care or a 6-h group structured education programme with an annual refresher course for 2 y. The primary outcome was progression to T2DM at 3 y. The characteristics of those who attended the initial education session (engagers) versus nonengagers and those who attended all sessions (retainers) versus nonretainers were compared. Risk reduction of progression to T2DM by level of attendance was compared to standard care. Eight hundred and eighty participants were recruited, with 447 to the intervention arm, of which 346 (77.4%) were engagers and 130 (29.1%) were retainers. Retainers and engagers were more likely to be older, leaner, and nonsmokers than nonretainers/nonengagers. Engagers were also more likely to be male and be from less socioeconomically deprived areas than nonengagers. Participants who attended the initial session and at least one refresher session were less likely to develop T2DM compared to those in the control arm (30 people of 248 versus 67 people of 433, HR 0.38 [95% CI 0.24โ0.62]). Participants who were retained in the programme were also less likely to develop T2DM compared to those in the control arm (7 people of 130 versus 67 people of 433, HR 0.12 [95% CI 0.05โ0.28]). Being retained in the programme was also associated with improvements in glucose, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, waist circumference, anxiety, quality of life, and daily step count. Given that the data used are from a clinical trial, those taking part might reflect a more motivated sample than the population, which should be taken into account when interpreting the results.
Conclusions:
This study suggests that being retained/engaged in a relatively low-resource, pragmatic diabetes prevention programme for those at high risk is associated with reductions in the progression to T2DM in comparison to those who receive standard care. Nonengagers and nonretainers share similar high-risk traits. Service providers of programmes should focus on reaching these hard-to-reach groups
Walking away from type 2 diabetes: trial protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating a structured education programme in those at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
Background:The prevention of type 2 diabetes is a recognised health care priority globally. Within the United Kingdom, there is a lack of research investigating optimal methods of translating diabetes prevention programmes, based on the promotion of a healthy lifestyle, into routine primary care. This study aims to establish the behavioural and clinical effectiveness of a structured educational programme designed to target perceptions and knowledge of diabetes risk and promote a healthily lifestyle, particularly increased walking activity, in a multi-ethnic population at a high risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
Design:Cluster randomised controlled trial undertaken at the level of primary care practices. Follow-up will be conducted at 12, 24 and 36โmonths. The primary outcome is change in objectively measured ambulatory activity. Secondary outcomes include progression to type 2 diabetes, biochemical variables (including fasting glucose, 2-h glucose, HbA1c and lipids), anthropometric variables, quality of life and depression.
Methods:10 primary care practices will be recruited to the study (5 intervention, 5 control). Within each practice, individuals at high risk of impaired glucose regulation will be identified using an automated version of the Leicester Risk Assessment tool. Individuals scoring within the 90th percentile in each practice will be invited to take part in the study. Practices will be assigned to either the control group (advice leaflet) or the intervention group, in which participants will be invited to attend a 3 hour structured educational programme designed to promote physical activity and a healthy lifestyle. Participants in the intervention practices will also be invited to attend annual group-based maintenance workshops and will receive telephone contact halfway between annual sessions. The study will run from 2010โ2014.
Discussion:This study will provide new evidence surrounding the long-term effectiveness of a diabetes prevention programme run within routine primary care in the United Kingdom.
Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.Gov identifier: NCT0094195
Engagement, Retention, and Progression to Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Analysis of the Cluster-Randomised "Let's Prevent Diabetes" Trial
Background:
Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a global priority. Letโs Prevent Diabetes is a group-based diabetes prevention programme; it was evaluated in a cluster-randomised trial, in which the primary analysis showed a reduction in T2DM (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% CI 0.48โ1.14, p = 0.18). We examined the association of engagement and retention with the Letโs Prevent Diabetes prevention programme and T2DM incidence.
Methods and Findings:
We used data from a completed cluster-randomised controlled trial including 43 general practices randomised to receive either standard care or a 6-h group structured education programme with an annual refresher course for 2 y. The primary outcome was progression to T2DM at 3 y. The characteristics of those who attended the initial education session (engagers) versus nonengagers and those who attended all sessions (retainers) versus nonretainers were compared. Risk reduction of progression to T2DM by level of attendance was compared to standard care. Eight hundred and eighty participants were recruited, with 447 to the intervention arm, of which 346 (77.4%) were engagers and 130 (29.1%) were retainers. Retainers and engagers were more likely to be older, leaner, and nonsmokers than nonretainers/nonengagers. Engagers were also more likely to be male and be from less socioeconomically deprived areas than nonengagers. Participants who attended the initial session and at least one refresher session were less likely to develop T2DM compared to those in the control arm (30 people of 248 versus 67 people of 433, HR 0.38 [95% CI 0.24โ0.62]). Participants who were retained in the programme were also less likely to develop T2DM compared to those in the control arm (7 people of 130 versus 67 people of 433, HR 0.12 [95% CI 0.05โ0.28]). Being retained in the programme was also associated with improvements in glucose, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, waist circumference, anxiety, quality of life, and daily step count. Given that the data used are from a clinical trial, those taking part might reflect a more motivated sample than the population, which should be taken into account when interpreting the results.
Conclusions:
This study suggests that being retained/engaged in a relatively low-resource, pragmatic diabetes prevention programme for those at high risk is associated with reductions in the progression to T2DM in comparison to those who receive standard care. Nonengagers and nonretainers share similar high-risk traits. Service providers of programmes should focus on reaching these hard-to-reach groups