Replicating group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes: a review of intervention reporting.

AIMS: To assess the completeness of reporting of group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A previous systematic review of group-based education programmes for adults with type 2 diabetes identified eligible intervention studies. Data were extracted and assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication ('TIDieR') checklist. Missing data were sourced from other published material, or by contacting authors. RESULTS: Fifty-three publications describing 47 studies were included. No publications sufficiently described all items. Authors of 43 of the 47 included studies (91%) were contacted via e-mail to obtain missing data in order to complete the TIDieR checklist. Seven (16%) did not respond. Additional data were obtained for 33/47 studies (70%). Most studies (45/47, 96%) described the intervention duration and frequency, detailed the procedures and rationale (40/47, 85%), provided a brief intervention name and explained any individual tailoring (38/47, 81%), defined whether providers received training and adequately described how the programme was delivered (37/47, 79%). However, few described any modifications (28/47, 60%), whether the intervention was delivered as planned (27/47, 57%), where it was delivered (21/47, 45%), whether materials were provided (19/47, 40%), and who delivered the intervention (13/47, 28%). CONCLUSIONS: Group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes are poorly reported. To translate effective research into practice, practitioners need sufficient detail to implement evidence-based interventions. Researcher adoption of the TIDieR checklist will assist the translation and replication of published interventions.

Effectiveness of group-based self-management education for individuals with Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analyses and meta-regression.

AIMS: Patient education for the management of Type 2 diabetes can be delivered in various forms, with the goal of promoting and supporting positive self-management behaviours. This systematic review aimed to determine the effectiveness of group-based interventions compared with individual interventions or usual care for improving clinical, lifestyle and psychosocial outcomes in people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched. Group-based education programmes for adults with Type 2 diabetes that measured glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c ) and followed participants for ≥ 6 months were included. The primary outcome was HbA1c , and secondary outcomes included fasting blood glucose, weight, body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, blood lipid profiles, diabetes knowledge and self-efficacy. RESULTS: Fifty-three publications describing 47 studies were included (n = 8533 participants). Greater reductions in HbA1c occurred in group-based education compared with controls at 6-10 months [n = 30 studies; mean difference (MD) = 3 mmol/mol (0.3%); 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.48, -0.15; P = 0.0002], 12-14 months [n = 27 studies; MD = 4 mmol/mol (0.3%); 95% CI: -0.49, -0.17; P < 0.0001], 18 months [n = 3 studies; MD = 8 mmol/mol (0.7%); 95% CI: -1.26, -0.18; P = 0.009] and 36-48 months [n = 5 studies; MD = 10 mmol/mol (0.9%); 95% CI: -1.52, -0.34; P = 0.002], but not at 24 months. Outcomes also favoured group-based education for fasting blood glucose, body weight, waist circumference, triglyceride levels and diabetes knowledge, but not at all time points. Interventions facilitated by a single discipline, multidisciplinary teams or health professionals with peer supporters resulted in improved outcomes in HbA1c when compared with peer-led interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Group-based education interventions are more effective than usual care, waiting list control and individual education at improving clinical, lifestyle and psychosocial outcomes in people with Type 2 diabetes.