Upload
alannah-harrell
View
217
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
“Ready to Act“ - a health education programme
16th Nordic Congress of General PracticeCopenhagen, May 14, 2009
Helle Terkildsen Maindal, RN, MPH, PhD Department of General Practice, Aarhus University, Denmark
Anglo-Danish-Dutch study of intensive treatment in people with screen detected diabetes in primary careReach, process evaluation and effects
of the “Ready to Act” intervention
Aims of this presentation
• To illustrate the challenges of the implementation and
evaluation of a health-promoting intervention for
people screen-detected in general practice with type 2
diabetes, impaired glucose tolerance or impaired
fasting glucose
Today’s presentation
• Target group
• Brief introduction to the intervention
• Attendance
• Initial outcomes
• Intermediary outcomes
• Long-term outcomes
What kind of intervention was needed?
• People with prediabetes and T2 diabetes diagnosed by screening in
general practice, recruited from the ADDITION-study *
• After the screening-procedure followed early multi-factorial
intervention, behavioural and pharmacological
• This intervention is one of the patient adressed behavioural
interventions aiming at health promotion
*The Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-
Detected Diabetes in Primary Care
Study population and design
509 randomised at the individual level (2:1)
322 Intervention 187 Control
Conventional treatment
ADDITION-study, general practice, Denmark
Intensive treatment
People with screen-detected dysglycaemia
”Right at the beginning you
need somebody’s arms around you”
(Peel, 2004)
”Right at the beginning you
need somebody’s arms around you”
(Peel, 2004)
”No symptoms, no
problem?” (Adriaanse,
2003, Lawton, 2005)
”No symptoms, no
problem?” (Adriaanse,
2003, Lawton, 2005)
”I feel I lack knowledge and
confidence” (Lawton, 2005)
”I feel I lack knowledge and
confidence” (Lawton, 2005)
”My GP focuses on the blood
sugars -I focus on my
cooking”(Woodcock,2001)
”My GP focuses on the blood
sugars -I focus on my
cooking”(Woodcock,2001)
”It is a mild disease”
(Adriaanse, 2002)
”It is a mild disease”
(Adriaanse, 2002)
Action Competence
Individualinterview
IndividualinterviewGroup meetings
Health beliefs
Readiness to change
Outcome expectan-cies
Action plan
Feed back
Looking ahead
Social support
Informed decision-making
Motivation Informed decision-making
Action experience
1
Cardio-vascular risk and dys-glycaemia:
Symptoms, signs, physiology, causes and treatment. Action planning.
2
Preventive actions:
Health behaviour and medical treatment.
The collabo-rative approach.
3
Actions related to diet:
Blood glucose, lipids, weight and well-being.
Change strategies.
Action planning.
4
Actions related to physical activity:
Physical exercise and blood glucose.
Change strategies.
Resources and barriers.
5
Actions related to diet:
Health beliefs.
Foods composi-tion and purchase.
6
Actions related to diet:
Skill training.
Eating patterns.
Everyday and occasional food.
7Actions related to physical activity:
Skill training.
Effects on risk, weight and blood glucose.
8
Attitude to risk and diagnose:
Variations in feelings.
Action planning.
Support and local resources.
Nurse and GPNurse NurseNurse Dietician Dietician
Physio-therapist
Physio-therapistDietician Nurse
Social involvement
Outcomes
• Initial outcomes (3 months)
• Autonomy support
• Perceived outcome
• Recommend the intervention to others
• Intermediary outcomes (1 year)
• Treatment motivation
• Perceived competence
• Long-term outcomes (1 year)
• Activation
• Dietary quality
• Physical activity
• Long-term outcomes (3 year)• HbA1c
• Lipids• Body Mass Index• Cardiovascular risk score
Baseline characteristics
Randomisation groups
All n Intervention n Control n
Age, year mean (SD) 61.8 (7.2) 509 62.2 (6.9) 322 61.2 (7.6) 187
Sex, % female 46,8 509 47,2 322 46 187
Diagnosis, % prediabetes
47,5 509 46 322 50,3 187
Diagnosis duration, year mean (SD)
1.7 (1.8) 509 1.8 (1.8) 322 1.6 (1.8) 187
Body mass index (kg/m2)
30.0 (5.3) 501 29.9 (5.1) 315 30.2 (5.8) 186
Glycated haemoglobin (%)
6.0 (0.9) 509 6.0 (0.8) 322 6.1 (0.9) 187
Intervention reach in the randomised controlled trial
Intervention group (N=322)
38% (n=123)Accepted the programme and completed
6% (n=19)Accepted, but did not complete
34% (n=109) Declined the invitation
22% (n=71) No response
Control group (N=187)
Effect evaluation
• Moderate effects on psychological outcomes
• No effects on diet, physical activity or activation
• No evidence of clinical outcomes (yet)
Process evaluation
• Reach 38%• Perceived autonomy support
median 6,2 (max. 7)• 90% would recommend the
intervention to others• 80% perceived positive or
very positive outcomes
Results of 1-year follow-up (short form!)
Are these conflicting results? Not necessarily …
Discussion
• Did the intervention work?
• Did we choose the right outcomes?
• Do we have sufficient evidence for further
implementation?
• If further implementation...
• Do we need further evidence?
• Are there critical areas to be adjusted?
Conclusion and perspectives
• Transparent and systematic intervention development
• 44% accepted the intervention, 38% completed
• Positive process evaluation
• Moderate effects – clinical relevance?
• Intervention linked to health promotion activities after early detection of T2
diabetes and prediabetes remains a future challenge….
”Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”
(Bland & Altman 1995)
Financial support: University College of Jutland, Danish Council of Nursing, The Danish Diabetes Association, Novo Nordic Foundation DK