• search hit 10 of 13
Back to Result List

Education in daily routine vs. RCT: health care research on the efficacy of an education and treatment program (Primas) for people with type 1 diabetes.

  • A new treatment program has to prove its effectiveness in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). However, health care research trials (HCRT) show that the effi cacy of education programs is far less convincing in daily routine. We evaluated whether a new education and treatment program for type 1 diabetic patients (PRIMAS) had similar effects in daily routine as in the RCT. 255 people with type 1 diabetes from 42 practices took part in the PRIMAS course and were observed in this HCRT. As in the RCT, PRIMAS consisted of 12 lessons and the outcomes were assessed 6 months after the education course. Primary outcome in both studies was HbA1c assessed in the same central laboratory. Improvement in hypoglycemia Awareness, depressive symptoms, diabetes-related distress, self-effi cacy, and diabetes empowerment were secondary outcomes. In order to compare the effects of PRIMAS in the RCT with the effects in the HCRT, effect sizes of differences for each study were contrasted. The difference of the two respective effect sizes (RCTA new treatment program has to prove its effectiveness in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). However, health care research trials (HCRT) show that the effi cacy of education programs is far less convincing in daily routine. We evaluated whether a new education and treatment program for type 1 diabetic patients (PRIMAS) had similar effects in daily routine as in the RCT. 255 people with type 1 diabetes from 42 practices took part in the PRIMAS course and were observed in this HCRT. As in the RCT, PRIMAS consisted of 12 lessons and the outcomes were assessed 6 months after the education course. Primary outcome in both studies was HbA1c assessed in the same central laboratory. Improvement in hypoglycemia Awareness, depressive symptoms, diabetes-related distress, self-effi cacy, and diabetes empowerment were secondary outcomes. In order to compare the effects of PRIMAS in the RCT with the effects in the HCRT, effect sizes of differences for each study were contrasted. The difference of the two respective effect sizes (RCT - HCRT) along with the 95% confi dence interval was analyzed. HbA1c reduction in the RCT was -0.36% (-3.9 mmol/mol) as compared to -0.39% (-4.3 mmol/mol) in the HCRT. The difference of the effect sizes didn’t exceed the non-inferiority margin of 0.4 (difference of effect size: α -0.03, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.22). Effect sizes in all secondary outcomes were also highly comparable: Improvement of hypoglycemia awareness α 0.11, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.38; reduction of depressive symptoms α -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18; reduction of diabetes distress α 0.23, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.49; improvement of self-effi cacy α 0.05, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.32; improvement of empowerment α 0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.36. PRIMAS proofed its effi cacy in daily routine and showed similar effect sizes as in the RCT. PRIMAS can contribute to an improvement of routine health care in people with type 1 diabetes.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Institutes:Fakultät Humanwissenschaften / Lehrstuhl für Klinische Psychologie/Psychotherapie
Author:Dominic Ehrmann, Norbert Hermanns, Nikola Bergis-Jurgan, Thomas Haak, Bernhard Kulzer
Place of publication:Bamberg
Publisher:OPUS
Year of publication:2016
Pages / Size:1 pdf-Datei (1 S.)
Year of first publication:2015
Source/Other editions:Ursprünglich in: Diabetes 64 (2015) Supplement 1, A189
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:473-opus4-464159
Document Type:Variety of texts
Language:English
Peer Review:Ja
Internationale Verbreitung:Ja
Publishing Institution:Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg
Release Date:2016/07/11