Hu Xiling, Deng Hongrong, Zhang Yao, Guo Xiaodi, Cai Mengyin, Ling Cong, Li Kun
Department of Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2021 Mar 22;14:1315-1327. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S297913. eCollection 2021.
The main aim of this study was to evaluate a combined fasting blood glucose based dosage self-titration setting and decision supported telephone coaching intervention on glycemic control and diabetes self-management skills, compared to the conventional care.
A 12-week, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted on adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) primarily treated with basal insulin. After randomization, the intervention group (IG, n = 426) received a basal insulin self-titration decision support intervention administered by the Diabetes Specialty Nurses while the control group (CG, n = 423) received conventional care for 12 weeks, both included five telephone interviews. The primary efficacy endpoint was the effect of intervention on glycemic control, measured as the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to Week 12 (after intervention) compared to the control group. Other endpoints included comparisons of the effects of intervention on fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), body weight, Michigan diabetes knowledge test (MDKT), diabetes empowerment scale-short Form (DES-DSF), and summary of diabetes self-care activities (SDSCA). Changes in the primary and secondary outcomes were compared using the -test for continuous variables with a normal distribution and -test for categorical variables.
The IG showed more improvements on mean HbA1c, compared to the CG (-2.8% vs -1.8%), so did the FPG, PPG, MDKT, DES-DSF and SDSCA (all P<0.01) after the 12-week follow up. Though the final mean insulin dose in the IG was higher than the CG at the end of the study (0.32 U/kg vs 0.28 U/kg), the changes of body weight were similar between the two groups (0.46kg vs 0.40kg, P=0.246), and the proportion of patients with hypoglycemia events during the whole trial were similar (20.65% vs 17.73%, P=0.279).
Decision supporting of basal insulin glargine self-titration assisted by Diabetes Specialty Nurses is effective and safe in patients with T2DM. Decision supported telephone coaching intervention offers ongoing encouragement, guidance, and determination of relevant sources of decisional conflict, facilitating adjusting the insulin dose.
本研究的主要目的是评估基于空腹血糖的联合剂量自我滴定设置以及决策支持电话指导干预对血糖控制和糖尿病自我管理技能的影响,并与传统护理进行比较。
对主要接受基础胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病(T2DM)成年患者进行了一项为期12周的单盲随机对照试验。随机分组后,干预组(IG,n = 426)接受由糖尿病专科护士实施的基础胰岛素自我滴定决策支持干预,而对照组(CG,n = 423)接受为期12周的传统护理,两组均包括五次电话访谈。主要疗效终点是干预对血糖控制的影响,以糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)从基线到第12周(干预后)的变化与对照组进行比较来衡量。其他终点包括干预对空腹血糖(FPG)、餐后血糖(PPG)、体重、密歇根糖尿病知识测试(MDKT)、糖尿病赋权量表简表(DES-DSF)以及糖尿病自我护理活动总结(SDSCA)影响的比较。使用正态分布连续变量的t检验和分类变量的χ²检验比较主要和次要结局的变化。
12周随访后,与对照组相比,干预组在平均HbA1c方面改善更明显(-2.8%对-1.8%),FPG、PPG、MDKT、DES-DSF和SDSCA也是如此(均P<0.01)。尽管研究结束时干预组的最终平均胰岛素剂量高于对照组(0.32 U/kg对0.28 U/kg),但两组体重变化相似(0.46kg对0.40kg,P = 0.246),整个试验期间低血糖事件患者比例相似(分别为20.65%和17.73%,P = 0.279)。
糖尿病专科护士协助的甘精胰岛素基础剂量自我滴定决策支持对T2DM患者有效且安全。决策支持电话指导干预提供持续鼓励、指导并确定决策冲突的相关来源,有助于调整胰岛素剂量。