Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Gen Intern Med ; 35(9): 2637-2646, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31965526

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Intensive lifestyle interventions (LI) improve outcomes in obesity and type 2 diabetes but are not currently available in usual care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and costs of two group LI programs, in-person LI and telephone conference call (telephone LI), to medical nutrition therapy (MNT) on weight loss in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: A randomized, assessor-blinded, practice-based clinical trial in three community health centers and one hospital-based practice affiliated with a single health system. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 208 primary care patients with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c 6.5 to < 11.5, and BMI > 25 kg/m2 (> 23 kg/m2 in Asians). INTERVENTIONS: Dietitian-delivered in-person or telephone group LI programs with medication management or MNT referral. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome: mean percent weight change. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: 5% and 10% weight loss, change in HbA1c, and cost per kilogram lost. KEY RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 62 (SD 10) years, 45% were male, and 77% were White, with BMI 35 (SD 5) kg/m2 and HbA1c 7.7 (SD 1.2). Seventy were assigned to in-person LI, 72 to telephone LI, and 69 to MNT. The mean percent weight loss (95% CI) at 6 and 12 months was 5.6% (4.4-6.8%) and 4.6% (3.1-6.1%) for in-person LI, 4.6% (3.3-6.0%) and 4.8% (3.3-6.2%) for telephone LI, and 1.1% (0.2-2.0%) and 2.0% (0.9-3.0%) for MNT, with statistically significant differences between each LI arm and MNT (P < 0.001) but not between LI arms (P = 0.63). HbA1c improved in all participants. Compared with MNT, the incremental cost per kilogram lost was $789 for in-person LI and $1223 for telephone LI. CONCLUSIONS: In-person LI or telephone group LI can achieve good weight loss outcomes in primary care type 2 diabetes patients at a reasonable cost. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02320253.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Aged , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Female , Humans , Life Style , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/therapy , Primary Health Care , Weight Loss
2.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun ; 15: 100374, 2019 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31193095

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Aims: The REAL HEALTH Diabetes Study is a practice-based randomized clinical trial that compares the effectiveness of lifestyle intervention aimed at weight reduction to medical nutrition therapy in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes. This paper describes a tiered approach to recruitment, the resultant enrollment rates of sequentially more intensive recruitment strategies, and identifies barriers to participation. METHODS: Potential participants were identified using patient health registries and classified by recruitment site. Four recruitment strategies were used to achieve target enrollment: (1) mail/telephone outreach; (2) direct referral from providers; (3) orientation sessions; and (4) media/advertising. Reasons for ineligibility and non-participation were tracked. RESULTS: Fifteen thousand two hundred sixty-nine (15,269) potential participants were identified from all sources, with the clear majority coming from patient registries. Mail/telephone outreach alone had the lowest enrollment rate (1.2%). Direct referral and orientation sessions superimposed on mail/telephone outreach was used for fewer participants but had greater enrollment rates (27% and 52%.) Media/advertising was ineffective. The most commonly reported reasons for non-participation were not wanting to be in a research (30%) or a weight loss program (22%); time commitment (20%); and distance/transportation (14%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of population registries to identify potential participants coupled with successively more intensive recruitment strategies, executed in a tiered approach moving toward personal engagement to establish trust and credibility, maximized recruitment enrollment rates. Our findings regarding facilitators and barriers to recruitment could be used to inform other practice-based research or to engage patients in group interventions in usual care settings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02320253.

3.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 71: 9-17, 2018 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29803816

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The REAL HEALTH -Diabetes Study is a practice-based clinical trial that adapted the Look AHEAD lifestyle intervention for implementation in primary care settings. The trial will compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of in-person group lifestyle intervention, telephone group lifestyle intervention, and individual medical nutrition therapy (MNT), the current recommended standard of care in type 2 diabetes. The primary outcome is percent weight loss at 6 months with outcomes also measured at 12, 18, 24 (intervention completion), and 36 months. Here, we describe the adaptation, trial design, implementation strategies, and baseline characteristics of enrolled participants. METHODS: The study is a three-arm, patient-level, randomized trial conducted in three community health centers (CHCs) and one diabetes practice affiliated with one academic medical center. RESULTS: The study used existing clinical infrastructure to recruit participants from study sites. Strategies for successful conduct of the trial included partnering with health-center based co-investigator clinicians, engaging primary care providers, and accommodating clinical workflows. Of 248 eligible patients who attended a screening visit, 211 enrolled, with 70 randomly assigned to in-person group lifestyle intervention, 72 to telephone group lifestyle intervention, and 69 to MNT. The cohort was 55% female, 29% non-white, with mean age 62 years and mean BMI 35 kg/m2. Enrollment rates were higher at CHC sites. CONCLUSIONS: A practice-based randomized trial of a complex behavioral lifestyle intervention for type 2 diabetes can be implemented in community health and usual clinical settings. Participant and provider engagement was higher at local CHC sites reflecting the study implementation focus. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02320253.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Diet Therapy , Obesity , Primary Health Care/methods , Psychotherapy, Group , Risk Reduction Behavior , Ambulatory Care Facilities , Body Mass Index , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/psychology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Diet Therapy/economics , Diet Therapy/methods , Female , Humans , Life Style , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/epidemiology , Obesity/psychology , Obesity/therapy , Psychotherapy, Group/economics , Psychotherapy, Group/methods , Treatment Outcome , United States , Weight Loss
4.
Diabetes Care ; 36(1): 13-9, 2013 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22933432

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether diabetes genetic risk testing and counseling can improve diabetes prevention behaviors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial of diabetes genetic risk counseling among overweight patients at increased phenotypic risk for type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomly allocated to genetic testing versus no testing. Genetic risk was calculated by summing 36 single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with type 2 diabetes. Participants in the top and bottom score quartiles received individual genetic counseling before being enrolled with untested control participants in a 12-week, validated, diabetes prevention program. Middle-risk quartile participants were not studied further. We examined the effect of this genetic counseling intervention on patient self-reported attitudes, program attendance, and weight loss, separately comparing higher-risk and lower-risk result recipients with control participants. RESULTS: The 108 participants enrolled in the diabetes prevention program included 42 participants at higher diabetes genetic risk, 32 at lower diabetes genetic risk, and 34 untested control subjects. Mean age was 57.9 ± 10.6 years, 61% were men, and average BMI was 34.8 kg/m(2), with no differences among randomization groups. Participants attended 6.8 ± 4.3 group sessions and lost 8.5 ± 10.1 pounds, with 33 of 108 (30.6%) losing ≥5% body weight. There were few statistically significant differences in self-reported motivation, program attendance, or mean weight loss when higher-risk recipients and lower-risk recipients were compared with control subjects (P > 0.05 for all but one comparison). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes genetic risk counseling with currently available variants does not significantly alter self-reported motivation or prevention program adherence for overweight individuals at risk for diabetes.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/genetics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Genetic Counseling , Aged , Female , Genetic Testing , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Overweight
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...