13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Supporting people with type 2 diabetes in effective use of their medicine through mobile health technology integrated with clinical care (SuMMiT-D Feasibility): a randomised feasibility trial protocol

      protocol

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Type 2 diabetes is common, affecting over 400 million people worldwide. Risk of serious complications can be reduced through use of effective treatments and active self-management. However, people are often concerned about starting new medicines and face difficulties in taking them regularly. Use of brief messages to provide education and support self-management, delivered through mobile phone-based text messages, can be an effective tool for some long-term conditions. We have developed messages aiming to support patients’ self-management of type 2 diabetes in the use of medications and other aspects of self-management, underpinned by theory and evidence. The aim of this trial is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale clinical trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, compared with usual care.

          Methods and analysis

          The feasibility trial will be a multicentre individually randomised, controlled trial in primary care recruiting adults (≥35 years) with type 2 diabetes in England. Consenting participants will be randomised to receive short text messages three times a week with messages designed to produce change in medication adherence or non-health-related messages for 6 months. The aims are to test recruitment methods, retention to the study, the feasibility of data collection and the mobile phone and web-based processes of a proposed definitive trial and to refine the text messaging intervention. The primary outcome is the rate of recruitment to randomisation of participants to the trial. Data, including patient reported measures, will be collected online at baseline and the end of the 6-month follow-up period. With 200 participants (100 in each group), this trial is powered to estimate 80% follow-up within 95% CIs of 73.8% to 85.3%. The analysis will follow a prespecified plan.

          Ethics and dissemination

          Ethics approval was obtained from the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 05. The results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed journals and will be published on the trial website: www.summit-d.org (SuMMiT-D (SUpport through Mobile Messaging and digital health Technology for Diabetes)).

          Trial registration number

          ISRCTN13404264.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          U.K. prospective diabetes study 16. Overview of 6 years' therapy of type II diabetes: a progressive disease. U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group.

          The objective of the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study is to determine whether improved blood glucose control in type II diabetes will prevent the complications of diabetes and whether any specific therapy is advantageous or disadvantageous. The study will report in 1998, when the median duration from randomization will be 11 years. This report is on the efficacy of therapy over 6 years of follow-up and the overall incidence of diabetic complications. Subjects comprised 4,209 newly diagnosed type II diabetic patients who after 3 months' diet were asymptomatic and had fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 6.0-15.0 mmol/l. The study consists of a randomized controlled trial with two main comparisons: 1) 3,867 patients with 1,138 allocated to conventional therapy, primarily with diet, and 2,729 allocated to intensive therapy with additional sulfonylurea or insulin, which increase insulin supply, aiming for FPG < 6 mmol/l; and 2) 753 obese patients with 411 allocated to conventional therapy and 342 allocated to intensive therapy with metformin, which enhances insulin sensitivity. In the first comparison, in 2,287 subjects studied for 6 years, intensive therapy with sulfonylurea and insulin similarly improved glucose control compared with conventional therapy, with median FPG at 1 year of 6.8 and 8.2 mmol/l, respectively (P < 0.0001). and median HbA1c of 6.1 and 6.8%, respectively (P < 0.0001). During the next 5 years, the FPG increased progressively on all therapies (P < 0.0001) with medians at 6 years in the conventional and intensive groups, FPG 9.5 and 7.8 mmol/l, and HbA1c 8.0 and 7.1%, respectively. The glycemic deterioration was associated with progressive loss of beta-cell function. In the second comparison, in 548 obese subjects studied for 6 years, metformin improved glucose control similarly to intensive therapy with sulfonylurea or insulin. Metformin did not increase body weight or increase the incidence of hypoglycemia to the same extent as therapy with sulfonylurea or insulin. A high incidence of clinical complications occurred by 6-year follow-up. Of all subjects, 18.0% had suffered one or more diabetes-related clinical endpoints, with 12.1% having a macrovascular and 5.7% a microvascular endpoint. Sulfonylurea, metformin, and insulin therapies were similarly effective in improving glucose control compared with a policy of diet therapy. The study is examining whether the continued improved glucose control, obtained by intensive therapy compared with conventional therapy (median over 6 years HbA1c 6.6% compared with 7.4%), will be clinically advantageous in maintaining health.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A review of diabetes treatment adherence and the association with clinical and economic outcomes.

            The benefits of drug therapy to diabetic patients in terms of glycemic control, microvascular complications, cardiovascular event risk, mortality, and quality of life have been well established by clinical trial data. However, it has been a challenge to quantify the relationship between adherence and outcomes such as glycemic control, disease-related events, hospitalizations, cost, and quality of life. This article provides a comprehensive summary of empirical studies that examine the associations between adherence and glycemic control, health care utilization, quality of life, and mortality in patients with diabetes. It is intended to provide a framework for researchers interested in conducting studies to improve their understanding of the value of medication adherence for patients with diabetes. Relevant published articles were identified through searches of the National Center for Biotechnology PubMed database. Medical subject heading (MESH) terms diabetes mellitus, hypoglycemic agents, and insulin, were each combined with the MESH term medication adherence and with the subheadings economics, prevention and control, psychology, statistics and numerical data, therapy, adverse effects, therapeutic use, and administration and dosage, where available. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) analyzed empirical data on some measure of patient adherence to diabetes pharmacotherapy; (2) described methods for measuring patient adherence; (3) evaluated economic, clinical, or humanistic outcomes related to diabetes; and (4) had as a goal of the research to evaluate the link between patient adherence and outcomes (as a primary or secondary objective). The data from the articles meeting these criteria were then abstracted, including mention of the specific interventions being compared, specific methods for measuring adherence, outcomes compared between adherent and nonadherent patients and how these outcomes were measured, and information on variables that were adjusted for in predictive and causal multivariable models. A total of 37 articles that met all 4 criteria in this review underwent data extraction. Of these studies, 22 (59%) used objective measures to assess adherence, with 1 study using pill counts to assess adherence and 21 using either pharmacy claims or similar refill records to assess refill behavior. The remaining 15 (41%) studies used a wide variety of subjective patient-reported adherence assessments. The majority (13/23 [57%]) of the glycemic control studies reported that improved adherence was associated with better glycemic control. The ability to draw a distinction between adherence and glycemic control tended to occur more frequently [7/9 (78%)] among studies that characterized adherence in terms of prescription refills compared with studies that used various constructs for patient-reported adherence measures. Based on the literature, better adherence was found to be associated with improved glycemic control and decreased health care resource utilization. There was no consistent association between improved adherence and decreased health care costs. Little data were available on the association between adherence and quality of life. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. Published by EM Inc USA. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What are validated self-report adherence scales really measuring?: a systematic review.

              Medication non-adherence is a significant health problem. There are numerous methods for measuring adherence, but no single method performs well on all criteria. The purpose of this systematic review is to (i) identify self-report medication adherence scales that have been correlated with comparison measures of medication-taking behaviour, (ii) assess how these scales measure adherence and (iii) explore how these adherence scales have been validated.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2019
                29 December 2019
                : 9
                : 12
                : e033504
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [2 ] departmentThe Division of Psychology and Mental Health , The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [3 ] departmentDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care , The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [4 ] departmentThe Institute of Biomedical Engineering , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [5 ] Patient Representative , Oxford, UK
                [6 ] departmentSchool of Health Sciences , Bangor University , Bangor, UK
                [7 ] departmentUCL School of Pharmacy , University College London , London, UK
                [8 ] departmentCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation , Bangor University , Bangor, UK
                [9 ] departmentInstitute of Population Health , The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [10 ] departmentHealth Service Research , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen, UK
                [11 ] departmentHealth Behaviour Change Research Group, School of Psychology , National University of Ireland Galway , Galway, Ireland
                [12 ] departmentDivision of Psychology and Mental Health , The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Professor Andrew Farmer; andrew.farmer@ 123456phc.ox.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6170-4402
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7663-7804
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6041-4051
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9002-3588
                Article
                bmjopen-2019-033504
                10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033504
                6937131
                31888938
                2a47920b-fe18-40e1-99c0-fab0598c4df9
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 09 August 2019
                : 30 October 2019
                : 04 December 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007602, Programme Grants for Applied Research;
                Award ID: RP-PG-1214-20003
                Categories
                Diabetes and Endocrinology
                Protocol
                1506
                1843
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                type 2 diabetes,digital health,behavioural change intervention,primary care,feasibility study,process evaluation,randomised controlled trial

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content92

                Cited by6