Bongaerts Brenda W C, Müssig Karsten, Wens Johan, Lang Caroline, Schwarz Peter, Roden Michael, Rathmann Wolfgang
Institute for Biometrics and Epidemiology, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD e.V.), Partner Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e013076. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013076.
We evaluated the effectiveness of European chronic care programmes for type 2 diabetes mellitus (characterised by integrative care and a multicomponent framework for enhancing healthcare delivery), compared with usual diabetes care.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL from January 2000 to July 2015.
Randomised controlled trials focussing on (1) adults with type 2 diabetes, (2) multifaceted diabetes care interventions specifically designed for type 2 diabetes and delivered in primary or secondary care, targeting patient, physician and healthcare organisation and (3) usual diabetes care as the control intervention.
Study characteristics, characteristics of the intervention, data on baseline demographics and changes in patient outcomes.
Weighted mean differences in change in HbA1c and total cholesterol levels between intervention and control patients (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model.
Eight cluster randomised controlled trials were identified for inclusion (9529 patients). One year of multifaceted care improved HbA1c levels in patients with screen-detected and newly diagnosed diabetes, but not in patients with prevalent diabetes, compared to usual diabetes care. Across all seven included trials, the weighted mean difference in HbA1c change was -0.07% (95% CI -0.10 to -0.04) (-0.8 mmol/mol (95% CI -1.1 to -0.4)); I=21%. The findings for total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and blood pressure were similar to HbA1c, albeit statistical heterogeneity between studies was considerably larger. Compared to usual care, multifaceted care did not significantly change quality of life of the diabetes patient. Finally, measured for screen-detected diabetes only, the risk of macrovascular and mircovascular complications at follow-up was not significantly different between intervention and control patients.
Effects of European multifaceted diabetes care patient outcomes are only small. Improvements are somewhat larger for screen-detected and newly diagnosed diabetes patients than for patients with prevalent diabetes.
我们评估了欧洲2型糖尿病慢性护理项目(其特点是综合护理以及用于改善医疗服务的多组分框架)与常规糖尿病护理相比的有效性。
系统评价和荟萃分析。
2000年1月至2015年7月期间的MEDLINE、Embase、CENTRAL和CINAHL。
随机对照试验,重点关注(1)成年2型糖尿病患者;(2)专门为2型糖尿病设计并在初级或二级护理中实施的多方面糖尿病护理干预措施,针对患者、医生和医疗组织;(3)常规糖尿病护理作为对照干预措施。
研究特征、干预措施特征、基线人口统计学数据以及患者结局变化数据。
使用随机效应模型估计干预组和对照组患者之间糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)和总胆固醇水平变化的加权平均差异(95%置信区间)。
共纳入8项整群随机对照试验(9529例患者)。与常规糖尿病护理相比,为期一年的多方面护理改善了筛查发现和新诊断糖尿病患者的HbA1c水平,但对已患糖尿病患者无效。在所有7项纳入试验中,HbA1c变化的加权平均差异为-0.07%(95%置信区间-0.10至-0.04)(-0.8 mmol/mol(95%置信区间-1.1至-0.4));I² = 21%。总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和血压的研究结果与HbA1c相似,尽管研究之间的统计异质性要大得多。与常规护理相比,多方面护理并未显著改变糖尿病患者的生活质量。最后,仅针对筛查发现的糖尿病进行测量,干预组和对照组患者随访时大血管和微血管并发症的风险无显著差异。
欧洲多方面糖尿病护理对患者结局的影响很小。筛查发现和新诊断糖尿病患者的改善程度略大于已患糖尿病患者。