Randomised controlled trial of structured personal care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Abstract Objective: To assess the effect of a multifaceted intervention directed at general practitioners on six year mortality, morbidity, and risk factors of patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Design: Pragmatic, open, controlled trial with randomisation of practices to structured personal care or routine care; analysis after 6 years. Setting: 311 Danish practices with 474 general practitioners (243 in intervention group and 231 in comparison group). Participants: 874 (90.1%) of 970 patients aged ≥40 years who had diabetes diagnosed in 1989-91 and survived until six year follow up. Intervention: Regular follow up and individualised goal setting supported by prompting of doctors, clinical guidelines, feedback, and continuing medical education. Main outcome measures: Predefined clinical non-fatal outcomes, overall mortality, risk factors, and weight. Results: Predefined non-fatal outcomes and mortality were the same in both groups. The following risk factor levels were lower for intervention patients than for comparison patients (median values): fasting plasma glucose concentration (7.9 v 8.7 mmol/l, P=0.0007), glycated haemoglobin (8.5% v 9.0%, P<0.0001; reference range 5.4-7.4%), systolic blood pressure (145 v 150 mm Hg, P=0.0004), and cholesterol concentration (6.0 v 6.1 mmol/l, P=0.029, adjusted for baseline concentration). Both groups had lost weight since diagnosis (2.6 v 2.0 kg). Metformin was the only drug used more frequently in the intervention group (24% (110/459) v 15% (61/415)).Intervention doctors arranged more follow up consultations, referred fewer patients to diabetes clinics, and set more optimistic goals. Conclusions: In primary care, individualised goals with educational and surveillance support may for at least six years bring risk factors of patients with type 2 diabetes to a level that has been shown to reduce diabetic complications but without weight gain. What is already known on this topic Evidence is increasing that control of hyperglycaemia, hypertension, and dyslipidaemia may postpone the development of diabetic complications in patients with type 2 diabetes Maintaining good control over a long period can be difficult What this study adds Structured individualised personal care with educational and surveillance support for general practitioners reduced levels of risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients after six years Risk factors were reduced to a level that has been shown to have a beneficial effect on diabetic complications Participants also showed modest weight loss

[1]  R. Holman,et al.  Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. , 1998 .

[2]  K. Midthjell,et al.  Treatment of diabetes mellitus--physicians' adherence to clinical guidelines in Norway. , 1997, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[3]  S. Griffin,et al.  Diabetes care in general practice: meta-analysis of randomised control trials. , 1998, BMJ.

[4]  S H Kaplan,et al.  Patients' participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. , 1988, Journal of general internal medicine.

[5]  Mickey C. Smith,et al.  Meta-Analysis of Correlates of Diabetes Patients' Compliance With Prescribed Medications , 1990, The Diabetes educator.

[6]  R. Grol,et al.  Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective? , 1998, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[7]  Jasmin A. Tiro,et al.  Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus , 2006 .

[8]  H. Blackburn,et al.  Cardiovascular survey methods. , 1969, Monograph series. World Health Organization.

[9]  A D Oxman,et al.  Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. , 1995, JAMA.

[10]  C. Kozma,et al.  Sulfonylurea Pharmacotherapy Regimen Adherence in a Medicaid Population: Influence of Age, Gender, and Race , 1999, The Diabetes educator.

[11]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Seeing what you want to see in randomised controlled trials: versions and perversions of UKPDS data , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  A. Lawthers,et al.  Variation in office-based quality. A claims-based profile of care provided to Medicare patients with diabetes. , 1995, JAMA.

[13]  M. Pringle,et al.  Influences on control in diabetes mellitus: patient, doctor, practice, or delivery of care? , 1993, BMJ.

[14]  Siep Thomas,et al.  Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: observational study , 1998, BMJ.

[15]  A. Majeed,et al.  General practice Cross sectional study of primary care groups in London: association of measures of socioeconomic and health status with hospital admission rates , 2022 .

[16]  L. Melton,et al.  Incidence of Diabetes Mellitus by Clinical Type , 1983, Diabetes Care.

[17]  B. Davis,et al.  Effect of diuretic-based antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular disease risk in older diabetic patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program Cooperative Research Group. , 1996, JAMA.

[18]  Terje R Pedersen,et al.  Cholesterol Lowering With Simvastatin Improves Prognosis of Diabetic Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: A subgroup analysis of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) , 1997, Diabetes Care.

[19]  A FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF RCTs FOR COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE HEALTH , 2000 .

[20]  S. Eldridge,et al.  Do clinical guidelines introduced with practice based education improve care of asthmatic and diabetic patients? A randomised controlled trial in general practices in east London , 1995, BMJ.

[21]  C. N. Hales,et al.  Non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. , 1997, British medical bulletin.

[22]  A. Sorknaes,et al.  Effect of diagnosis of "smoker's lung". RYLUNG Group. , 1997, Lancet.

[23]  R Jones,et al.  Does continuing medical education in general practice make a difference? , 1999, BMJ.

[24]  Philip D. Harvey,et al.  Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38 , 1998, BMJ.

[25]  A. Sorknaes,et al.  Effect of diagnosis of “smoker's lung” , 1997, The Lancet.

[26]  N R Dunn,et al.  Standards of care of diabetic patients in a typical English community. , 1996, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[27]  B. Davis,et al.  Effect of diuretic-based antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular disease risk in older diabetic patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program Cooperative Research Group. , 1996, JAMA.

[28]  W. Clarke,et al.  Methods in diabetes research , 1984 .

[29]  R. Prescott,et al.  Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. , 1999, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[30]  Jonathan P. Weiner,et al.  Variation in office-based quality , 1995 .

[31]  Ann Louise Kinmonth,et al.  General practice Randomised controlled trial of patient centred care of diabetes in general practice : impact on current wellbeing and future disease risk , 1998 .

[32]  O. Pedersen,et al.  Intensified multifactorial intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria: the Steno type 2 randomised study , 1999, The Lancet.

[33]  T. Cvetković,et al.  Quality of Life in Type 2 Diabetic Patients , 2014 .

[34]  A. Farmer,et al.  Organization of care for diabetic patients in general practice: influence on hospital admissions. , 1990, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[35]  Uk-Prospective-Diabetes-Study-Group Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33) , 1998, The Lancet.