Educational interventions did not seem to have a positive impact on HbA1c , systolic blood pressure or lipid profiles .
The use of telemedicine , clinician reminders and feedback showed mixed results but there was a level of consistency in improvement in HbA1c when multifaceted interventions on multidisciplinary teams were implemented .
Targeting general or family physicians was largely ineffective in improving the cardiovascular risk factors considered , except when using a computer application on insulin h and ling of type 2 diabetes or customised simulated cases with feedbacks .
Similarly , interventions targeting nurses did not improve outcomes compared to st and ard care .
Multifaceted professional interventions were more effective than single interventions targeting single primary or community care professionals in improving glycaemic control
OBJECTIVE To review the interventions targeting primary care or community based professionals on glycaemic and cardiovascular risk factor control in people with diabetes .
Randomised controlled trial of structured personal care of type 2 diabetes mellitus
Abstract Objective : To assess the effect of a multifaceted intervention directed at general practitioners on six year mortality , morbidity , and risk factors of patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes . Design : Pragmatic , open , controlled trial with r and omisation of practice s to structured personal care or routine care ; analysis after 6 years . Setting : 311 Danish practice s with 474 general practitioners ( 243 in intervention group and 231 in comparison group ) . Participants : 874 ( 90.1 % ) of 970 patients aged ≥40 years who had diabetes diagnosed in 1989 - 91 and survived until six year follow up . Intervention : Regular follow up and individualised goal setting supported by prompting of doctors , clinical guidelines , feedback , and continuing medical education . Main outcome measures : Predefined clinical non-fatal outcomes , overall mortality , risk factors , and weight . Results : Predefined non-fatal outcomes and mortality were the same in both groups . The following risk factor levels were lower for intervention patients than for comparison patients ( median values ) : fasting plasma glucose concentration ( 7.9 v 8.7 mmol/l , P=0.0007 ) , glycated haemoglobin ( 8.5 % v 9.0 % , P<0.0001 ; reference range 5.4 - 7.4 % ) , systolic blood pressure ( 145 v 150 mm Hg , P=0.0004 ) , and cholesterol concentration ( 6.0 v 6.1 mmol/l , P=0.029 , adjusted for baseline concentration ) . Both groups had lost weight since diagnosis ( 2.6 v 2.0 kg ) . Metformin was the only drug used more frequently in the intervention group ( 24 % ( 110/459 ) v 15 % (61/415)).Intervention doctors arranged more follow up consultations , referred fewer patients to diabetes clinics , and set more optimistic goals . Conclusions : In primary care , individualised goals with educational and surveillance support may for at least six years bring risk factors of patients with type 2 diabetes to a level that has been shown to reduce diabetic complications but without weight gain . What is already known on this topic Evidence is increasing that control of hyperglycaemia , hypertension , and dyslipidaemia may postpone the development of diabetic complications in patients with type 2 diabetes Maintaining good control over a long period can be difficult What this study adds Structured individualised personal care with educational and surveillance support for general practitioners reduced levels of risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients after six years Risk factors were reduced to a level that has been shown to have a beneficial effect on diabetic complications Participants also showed modest weight
Educational interventions did not seem to have a positive impact on HbA1c , systolic blood pressure or lipid profiles .
The use of telemedicine , clinician reminders and feedback showed mixed results but there was a level of consistency in improvement in HbA1c when multifaceted interventions on multidisciplinary teams were implemented .
Targeting general or family physicians was largely ineffective in improving the cardiovascular risk factors considered , except when using a computer application on insulin h and ling of type 2 diabetes or customised simulated cases with feedbacks .
Similarly , interventions targeting nurses did not improve outcomes compared to st and ard care .
Multifaceted professional interventions were more effective than single interventions targeting single primary or community care professionals in improving glycaemic control
OBJECTIVE To review the interventions targeting primary care or community based professionals on glycaemic and cardiovascular risk factor control in people with diabetes .