Khan Muhammad Amir, Walley John D, Khan Nida, Hicks Joseph, Ahmed Maqsood, Khan Shaheer Ellahi, Khan Muhammad Ahmar, Khan Haroon Jehangir, Harries Anthony D
Chief Coordinating Professional, Association for Social Development, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Professor of International Public Health, Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Leeds, UK.
BJGP Open. 2018 Dec 12;2(4):bjgpopen18X101618. doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen18X101618. eCollection 2018 Dec.
There were an estimated 7 million people living with diabetes in Pakistan in 2014, and this is predicted to reach 11.4 million by 2030.
To assess if an integrated care package can achieve better control of diabetes.
DESIGN & SETTING: The pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) was conducted from December 2014-June 2016 at 14 primary healthcare facilities in Sargodha district. Opportunistic screening, diagnostic testing, and patient recording processes were introduced in both the control 'testing, treating, and recording' (TTR) arm, and the intervention 'additional case management' (ACM) arm, which also included a clinical care guide and pictorial flipbook for lifestyle education, associated clinician training, and mobile phone follow-up.
Clinics were randomised on a 1:1 basis (sealed envelope lottery method) and 250 patients recruited in the ACM arm and 245 in the TTR-only arm (age ≥25 years and HbA1c >7%). The primary outcome was mean change in HbA1c (%) from baseline to 9-month follow-up. Patients and staff were not blinded.
The primary outcome was available for = 238/250 (95.2%) participants in the ACM arm and = 219/245 (89.4%) participants in the TTR-only arm (all clusters). Cluster level mean outcome was -2.26 pp (95% confidence intervals [CI] = -2.99 to -1.53) for the ACM arm, and -1.44 pp (95% CI = -2.34 to -0.54) for the TTR-only arm. Cluster level mean ACM-TTR difference (covariate-unadjusted) was -0.82 pp (95% CI = -1.86 to 0.21; = 0.11).
The ACM intervention in public healthcare facilities did not show a statistically significant effect on HbA1c reduction compared to the control (TTR-only) arm. Future evaluation should assess changes after a longer follow-up period, and minimal care enhancement in the comparator (control) arm.
2014年,巴基斯坦估计有700万人患有糖尿病,预计到2030年这一数字将达到1140万。
评估综合护理方案是否能更好地控制糖尿病。
2014年12月至2016年6月,在萨戈达县的14个初级医疗保健机构进行了实用的整群随机对照试验(cRCT)。在对照“检测、治疗和记录”(TTR)组和干预“额外病例管理”(ACM)组中都引入了机会性筛查、诊断检测和患者记录流程,ACM组还包括一份临床护理指南和用于生活方式教育的图画手册、相关临床医生培训以及手机随访。
诊所按1:1比例随机分组(密封信封抽签法),ACM组招募了250名患者,仅TTR组招募了245名患者(年龄≥25岁且糖化血红蛋白>7%)。主要结局是从基线到9个月随访时糖化血红蛋白(%)的平均变化。患者和工作人员未设盲。
ACM组有238/250(95.2%)的参与者可获得主要结局数据,仅TTR组有219/245(89.4%)的参与者(所有整群)可获得该数据。ACM组整群水平的平均结局为-2.26个百分点(95%置信区间[CI]=-2.99至-1.53),仅TTR组为-1.44个百分点(95%CI=-2.34至-0.54)。整群水平的平均ACM-TTR差异(未调整协变量)为-0.82个百分点(95%CI=-1.86至0.21;P=0.11)。
与对照组(仅TTR组)相比,公共医疗保健机构中的ACM干预在降低糖化血红蛋白方面未显示出统计学上的显著效果。未来的评估应在更长的随访期后评估变化情况,并评估对照(对照组)组中最小程度的护理增强措施。