Experience-based group education in Type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Long-term effects of self-management education for patients with Type 2 diabetes taking maximal oral hypoglycaemic therapy: a randomized trial in primary care. Assessment of group versus individual diabetes education: a randomized study. Implementing practice guidelines for diabetes care using problem-based learning. A prospective controlled trial using firm systems. Impact of self monitoring of blood glucose in the management of patients with non-insulin treated diabetes: open parallel group randomised trial. [The education of type-2 diabetics: why not in groups?]. A prospective randomised-controlled pilot study for evaluating the teaching utility of interactive educational diabetes simulators. Benefits provided by an integrated education and clinical diabetes centre: a follow-up study. Failure to maintain the benefits of home-based intervention in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes.
Few studies have demonstrated an effect of educational interventions on glycaemic control in persons with Type 2 diabetes longer than 3-6 months after baseline. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of an experience-based group educational programme 24 months after baseline and to pinpoint mediators that might play a role in achieving desired metabolic outcomes. We conducted a randomised controlled trial inviting self-referred persons with Type 2 diabetes (N=77 randomised). The pharmacist-led, year-long intervention was based on participants' experiences of glucose regulation during the monthly group discussions. We measured HbA1c at 0, 6, 12, and 24 months and a questionnaire was administered at baseline and final follow-up. Our findings indicated that participating in the intervention programme significantly decreased HbA1c by 0.4% at 24 months after baseline. Initial HbA1c, satisfaction with own diabetes-related knowledge, and treatment were found directly related to glycaemic outcomes. The intervention group exercised more in order to lower blood-glucose levels and was also more able to predict current blood-glucose levels before measuring it. Experience-based group education was effective in decreasing participants' HbA1c 1-year after completed intervention. Early effect of the intervention was followed by relapse after 12 months and a new, significant decrease at 24 months; this dual course implies that follow-up of educational interventions should involve several consecutive measurements to capture possible late effects. Both biomedical and subjective factors played a role in accounting for the variance of HbA1c at 2-year follow-up after baseline. Education is an essential part of the management of patients with Type 2 diabetes, but the long-term effects are unclear and not well investigated in primary care.
                Fifty-four patients (39-75 years) treated with maximal dosages of oral hypoglycaemic agents, needing to start insulin (HbA(1c)> or = 7.0%), were randomly allocated to a 6-month educational programme by a diabetes nurse (DN group) or usual care (UC group). Main outcome measures were HbA(1c), number of patients with HbA(1c) < 7.0%, and number of patients treated with insulin 18 months after baseline.
                Six weeks after the intervention HbA(1c) levels had improved from 8.2 (1.1) to 7.2 (1.3) in the DN group, and from 8.8 (1.5) to 8.4 (1.7) in the UC group. Adjusted for baseline values, at 6 weeks HbA(1c) improved 0.7% (95% confidence interval 0.1, 1.4) more in DN than in UC. Of the patients in DN, 60% reached HbA(1c) < 7.0% compared with 17% in UC (P < 0.01). However, at 18 months there were no significant differences for HbA(1c), number of patients with HbA(1c) < 7.0%, or number treated with insulin.
                Education was effective in improving glycaemic control and in delaying the need for insulin therapy in patients treated with maximal oral hypoglycaemic therapy. The reduced effect after 1 year was probably due to the discontinuation of the educational programme. Short-term education should not be offered without regular reinforcements integrated into standard diabetes care. The current study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of delivering diabetes education in either a group or individual setting using a consistent, evidence-based curriculum.
                A total of 170 subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to either group (n = 87) or individual (n = 83) educational settings. Subjects received education in four sequential sessions delivered at consistent time intervals over a 6-month period. Outcomes included changes in knowledge, self-management behaviors, weight, BMI, HbA(1c), health-related quality of life, patient attitudes, and medication regimen. Changes were assessed at baseline and after the 2-week, 3-month, and 6-month education sessions.
                Both educational settings had similar improvements in knowledge, BMI, health-related quality of life, attitudes, and all other measured indicators. HbA(1c) decreased from 8.5 +/- 1.8% at baseline to 6.5 +/- 0.8% at 6 months (P < 0.01) in the study population as a whole. Subjects assigned to the individual setting had a 1.7 +/- 1.9% reduction in HbA(1c) (P < 0.01), whereas subjects assigned to the group setting had a 2.5 +/- 1.8% reduction in HbA(1c) (P < 0.01). The difference in HbA(1c) improvement was marginally greater in subjects assigned to group education versus individualized education (P = 0.05).
                This study demonstrates that diabetes education delivered in a group setting, when compared with an individual setting, was equally effective at providing equivalent or slightly greater improvements in glycemic control. Group diabetes education was similarly effective in delivering key educational components and may allow for more efficient and cost-effective methods in the delivery of diabetes education programs. A controlled trial with 15-month follow-up was conducted in two outpatient clinics to study the effects of using the problem-based learning technique to implement a diabetes clinical practice guideline.
                A total of 144 patients with type 2 diabetes aged 25-65 years in two internal medicine outpatient clinics were enrolled in the study. African-Americans and Hispanics made up > 75% of the patients. Doctors and staff in one of the clinics were trained in the use of a clinical practice guideline based on Staged Diabetes Management. A problem-based learning educational program was instituted to reach consensus on a stepped intensification scheme for glycemic control and to determine the standards of care used in the clinic. HbA1c was obtained at baseline and at 9 and 15 months after enrollment.
                At 9 months, there was a mean -0.90% within-subject change in HbA1c in the intervention group, with no significant changes in the control group. The 15-month mean within-subject change in HbA1c of -0.62% in the intervention group was also significant. Among intervention patients, those with the poorest glycemic control at baseline realized the greatest benefit in improvement of HbA1c. The intervention group also exhibited significant changes in physician adherence with American Diabetes Association standards of care.
                Clinical practice guidelines are an effective way of improving the processes and outcomes of care for patients with diabetes. Problem-based learning is a useful strategy to gain physician support for clinical practice guidelines. More intensive interventions are needed to maintain treatment gains. To determine whether self monitoring, alone or with instruction in incorporating the results into self care, is more effective than usual care in improving glycaemic control in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes.
                Three arm, open, parallel group randomised trial.
                48 general practices in Oxfordshire and South Yorkshire.
                453 patients with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes (mean age 65.7 years) for a median duration of three years and a mean haemoglobin A1c level of 7.5%.
                Standardised usual care with measurements of HbA1c every three months as the control group (n=152), blood glucose self monitoring with advice for patients to contact their doctor for interpretation of results, in addition to usual care (n=150), and blood glucose self monitoring with additional training of patients in interpretation and application of the results to enhance motivation and maintain adherence to a healthy lifestyle (n=151).
                HbA1c level measured at 12 months.
                At 12 months the differences in HbA1c level between the three groups (adjusted for baseline HbA1c level) were not statistically significant (P=0.12). The difference in unadjusted mean change in HbA1c level from baseline to 12 months between the control and less intensive self monitoring groups was -0.14% (95% confidence interval -0.35% to 0.07%) and between the control and more intensive self monitoring groups was -0.17% (-0.37% to 0.03%).
                Evidence is not convincing of an effect of self monitoring blood glucose, with or without instruction in incorporating findings into self care, in improving glycaemic control compared with usual care in reasonably well controlled non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes.
                Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN47464659. To evaluate the efficacy of a programme of group education for diabetics, which succeeded in reducing base glucaemia, body mass index and glycosylated haemoglobin, stimulating insulin-treated patients' self-monitoring of glucaemia, improving their understanding of the disease, and bringing into group education 75% of the target population.
                A controlled clinical trial with paired samples, lasting two years.
                "Las Fuentes Norte" Health Centre, Zaragoza.
                243 type-2 diabetics, distributed at random, with 120 in the intervention group and 123 in the control group. All patients with no history of group education in the previous two years and with no restrictions on their attending talks and monitoring were included. No-one gave up in the first year; 9 did in the second year.
                Group health education workshop for two days in the first and second years.
                In the intervention group, at the end of the study, success in the survey increased by 4.2; base glucaemia dropped by 17.1 mg/dl, glycate haemoglobin went down by 0.5, and self-analysis went up by 14.2%, all with significant differences (p < 0.005 and CI 95%). The body mass index went down by 0.3 without significant differences. Knowledge was lost between the first and second year, with worse metabolic control. In the control group there were no significant differences in any variable.
                A stable programme of group education may be effective, especially because of the increase in knowledge of the disease, fostering excellent conditions for a change to a healthier life-style. AIDA is an interactive educational diabetes simulator that is useful for recreating clinically realistic diabetes situations. It is available without charge from http://www.2aida.org on the Web. This paper describes a prospective, clinical randomised-controlled trial (RCT) run at the Ospedale di Marino (Italy) for evaluating the educational utility of AIDA in small group teaching sessions. Twenty-four volunteers (12 male and 12 female) with Type 1 diabetes of more than 6-year duration, aged 19-48 years, who gave written informed consent, were randomly assigned to one of two study groups, each receiving different teaching interventions. Group A was exposed to the AIDA diabetes simulator, while Group B (the control group) received conventional lessons with slides and transparencies. Six lessons were held for each group (one per week). At the end of the conventional lessons, after a 'washout' period of 4 weeks, Group B entered a partial cross-over phase with the simulator during a further 6-week block of lessons. Before and after the 6 weeks of lessons, twice for Group A and 3 times for Group B, all subjects had their HbA1c measured. The subjects also carefully documented the incidence of any symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes ('hypos'), whether mild (sweating, dizziness), moderate (nausea, vomiting), or severe (requiring assistance). All data were analysed using non-parametric statistics (Wilcoxon signed rank tests). HbA1c levels in Group A dropped significantly from 7.2% to 6.4% after lessons with the diabetes simulator (p = 0.01). No significant changes in HbA1c were observed in Group B between baseline (7.1%) and the end of the control lessons (7.0%), or the end of the cross-over phase lessons (6.8%). The number of 'hypos' decreased significantly from 31 to 14 in Group A (p = 0.03) after AIDA lessons, but did not change significantly in Group B from baseline (n = 20) to after the control lessons (n = 22). However, the number of 'hypos' did decrease significantly (to n = 10) in Group B after exposure to the simulator during the cross-over phase (p = 0.03 vs 6-week data). Larger trials involving more patients in more centres are clearly needed, but this proof-of-concept (pilot) study does demonstrate the feasibility of using a prospective RCT approach for the evaluation of educational diabetes simulation software such as AIDA. The effects of a new integrated system of diabetes care with an enhanced role of the diabetes specialist nurse based in a purposed design diabetes centre, on diabetes control, attendance and cancellation rates, and admission for diabetic emergencies have been reviewed. Glycaemic control was examined in: (a) a cohort of 163 insulin-treated and 47 non-insulin treated diabetic subjects (age < 65 years) studied prospectively before and 3 years following the introduction of a new system of care; (b) a second cohort of more elderly patients aged greater than 65 years studied for the 3 years after the change over; (c) a cross-sectional study of the clinic population (n = 700) the year before and 3 years after the changeover; (d) a group of patients attending standard unaltered clinics in the same district (n = 157). Significant and sustained falls in HbA1 were observed in all groups of subjects attending the centre, with the means for those aged less than 65 falling from 11.9 +/- 2.3% to 9.9 +/- 1.9% and for those aged over 65 from a mean of 11.7 +/- 2.0% to 10.3 +/- 2.3%, 3 years later. The cross-sectional study provided similar results with a mean HbA1 of 12.2 +/- 3.0% prior to changeover and 10.4 +/- 4.4%, 3 years later. Smaller but significant changes were observed in patients continuing to attend the routine clinic (from 12.2 +/- 2.3% to 11.3 +/- 2.6%) over a similar period. Yearly admission rates for ketoacidosis and hypoglycaemia fell from 44 and 23, to 33 and 5 per annum, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) To determine whether a 6-month home-based intervention program in adolescents with poorly controlled diabetes improves metabolic control and whether benefits are maintained after the intervention.
                Adolescents with a mean HbA1c of > 9.0% over the preceding 12 months received either routine care in a diabetes clinic and an ambulatory intervention for 6 months (n = 37) or routine care only (n = 32). A diabetes educator provided monthly home visits and weekly phone contact to educate and support the adolescents in setting goals for insulin adjustment, blood glucose monitoring, and target blood glucose range. There was no systematic change in the frequency of insulin injections. After the intervention, there was a 12-month follow-up when the intervention and control groups both received only routine care. Outcome measures were HbA1c and Diabetes Knowledge Assessment (DKN).
                During the intervention, mean HbA1c fell (baseline: 11.1 +/- 1.3%, 6 months: 9.7 +/- 1.6%; P = 0.0001) and mean knowledge scores increased (P = 0.0001) in the intervention group but not in control subjects. However, this improvement in HbA1c and increase in knowledge was not maintained in the intervention group at 12- and 18-month follow-up assessments. Parents' knowledge scores also improved significantly from baseline levels in the intervention group at 6 and 12 months (P = 0.001, P = 0.005, respectively).
                An ambulatory program improves metabolic control and knowledge in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes; however, it is effective only while the intervention is maintained.
This systematic review suggests a benefit of individual education on glycaemic control when compared with usual care in a subgroup of those with a baseline HbA1c greater than 8%. However, overall there did not appear to be a significant difference between individual education and usual care. In the small number of studies comparing group and individual education, there was an equal impact on HbA1c at 12 to 18 months. Additional studies are needed to delineate these findings further.