MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/s11606-014-2855-4

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of general internal medicine · 2014

Effectiveness and safety of patient activation interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

Bolen Shari D, Chandar Apoorva, Falck-Ytter Corinna, Tyler Carl, Perzynski Adam T, Gertz Alida M, Sage Paulette, Lewis Steven, Cobabe Maurine, Ye Ying, Menegay Michelle, Windish Donna M

СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Patient activation interventions (PAIs) engage patients in care by promoting increased knowledge, confidence, and/or skills for disease self-management. However, little is known about the impact of these interventions on a wide range of outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes (DM2), or which of these interventions, if any, have the greatest impact on glycemic control.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from inception through November 2011. Of 16,290 citations, two independent reviewers identified 138 randomized trials comparing PAIs to usual care/control groups in adults with DM2 that reported intermediate or long-term outcomes or harms. For meta-analyses of continuous outcomes, we used a random-effects model to derive pooled weighted mean differences (WMD). For all-cause mortality, we calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) using Peto's method. We assessed statistical heterogeneity using the I (2) statistic and conducted meta-regression using a random-effects model when I (2) > 50 %. A priori meta-regression primary variables included: intervention strategies, intervention leader, baseline outcome value, quality, and study duration.

RESULTS

PAIs modestly reduced intermediate outcomes [A1c: WMD 0.37 %, CI 0.28-0.45 %, I (2) 83 %; SBP: WMD 2.2 mmHg, CI 1.0-3.5 mmHg, I (2) 72 %; body weight: WMD 2.3 lbs, CI 1.3-3.2 lbs, I (2) 64 %; and LDL-c: WMD 4.2 mg/dL, CI 1.5-6.9 mg/dL, I (2) 64 %]. The evidence was moderate for A1c, low/very low for other intermediate outcomes, low for long-term mortality and very low for complications. Interventions had no effect on hypoglycemia (evidence: low) or short-term mortality (evidence: moderate). Higher baseline A1c, pharmacist-led interventions, and longer follow-up were associated with larger A1c improvements. No intervention strategy outperformed any other in adjusted meta-regression.

CONCLUSIONS

PAIs modestly improve A1c in adults with DM2 without increasing short-term mortality. These results support integration of these interventions into primary care for adults with uncontrolled glycemia, and provide evidence to insurers who do not yet cover these programs.

Для цитирования: Bolen Shari D, Chandar Apoorva, Falck-Ytter Corinna, Tyler Carl, Perzynski Adam T, Gertz Alida M, Sage Paulette, Lewis Steven, Cobabe Maurine, Ye Ying, Menegay Michelle, Windish Donna M. Effectiveness and safety of patient activation interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.. Journal of general internal medicine. 2014. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-014-2855-4.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.