Rethink Organization to iMprove Education and Outcomes (ROMEO): a multicenter randomized trial of lifestyle intervention by group care to manage type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: A trial was performed to establish whether our group care model for lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes can be exported to other clinics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a 4-year, two-armed, multicenter controlled trial in 13 hospital-based diabetes clinics in Italy (current controlled trials no. ISRCTN19509463). A total of 815 non-insulin-treated patients aged <80 years with > or =1 year known diabetes duration were randomized to either group or individual care. RESULTS: After 4 years, patients in group care had lower A1C, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, BMI, and serum creatinine and higher HDL cholesterol (P < 0.001, for all) than control subjects receiving individual care, despite similar pharmacological prescriptions. Health behaviors, quality of life, and knowledge of diabetes had become better in group care patients than in control subjects (P < 0.001, for all). CONCLUSIONS: The favorable clinical, cognitive, and psychological outcomes of group care can be reproduced in different clinical settings.

Cost analysis of blood purification in intensive care units: continuous versus intermittent hemodiafiltration.

BACKGROUND: We implemented a program for continuous renal replacement therapies (CRRT) in intensive care units (ICU) based on the cooperative work of dialysis and ICU personnel. Our aim was to report the main details of this program and compare its cost with that of intermittent hemodiafiltration (IHDF). METHODS: The study referred to 181 ICU patients with renal failure. We considered the costs of both technical devices and assisting personnel. CRRT was performed as continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) (24 hr daily); dialysis and ICU nurses shared surveillance. Only dialysis nurses performed IHDF (as acetate-free biofiltration, 4 hr daily) in the ICU. RESULTS: The daily cost of CRRT was Euro 276.70; of which 79% was for devices and 21% was for human resources. Nurse surveillance required 141 min per day, ICU nurses supplied 55% (77 min) and dialysis nurses 45% (64 min). On average, CRRT surveillance required less than 1 min/nurse/hr for both dialysis and ICU nurses. The daily cost of 4-hr IHDF sessions of was Euro 247.83, of which 44% was for technical devices and 56% was for human resources. CONCLUSIONS: The cooperation between dialysis and ICUs improved the use of human resources and allowed us to supply CRRT to all critically ill patients with acute renal failure. The expenditure for CRRT was 12% higher than that for IHDF, due to the cost of technical devices.