Dataset Information

Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Telephone-delivered intervention can provide many supports in diabetes self-management to improve glycemic control. Several trials showed that telephone intervention was positively associated with glycemic outcomes in diabetes. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of telephone contact intervention (intervention group) on glycemic control compared with standard clinical care (control group).

Methods

Randomized control studies of telephone intervention in diabetes were searched on Medline (Pubmed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science (ISI), and Scopus. Electronic search was done from inception to April 2013. The following MeSH terms were used: diabetes mellitus, randomized control trials and telemedicine, together with keywords including phone intervention, diabetes, and glycemic control. Historical search was also conducted on the references of relevant articles. The quality of the trials was assessed using Maastricht-Amsterdam scale. Treatment effect was estimated with mean difference in the change of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline between the intervention and control groups.

Results

A total of 203 articles were examined. Five trials involving 953 patients met the inclusion criteria and contributed to the meta-analysis. Telephone contact intervention was no more effective than standard clinical care in improving glycemic control (pooled mean difference in HbA1c -0.38%, 95%CI -0.91 to 0.16%).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis showed that the phone contact intervention was no more effective than standard clinical care in improving glycemic control in diabetes. However, telephone intervention may still have potential benefits especially for low-and middle-income countries; thus further large sample size and well-controlled studies are needed to evaluate the impact of the intervention.

SUBMITTER: Suksomboon N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3929650 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Suksomboon Naeti N Poolsup Nalinee N Nge Yuu Lay YL

PloS one 20140219 2

<h4>Background</h4>Telephone-delivered intervention can provide many supports in diabetes self-management to improve glycemic control. Several trials showed that telephone intervention was positively associated with glycemic outcomes in diabetes. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of telephone contact intervention (intervention group) on glycemic control compared with standard clinical care (control group).<h4>Methods</h4>Randomized control studies of telephone interven ...[more]

PMID: 24586596

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The popularity of internet as an area of research has grown manifold over the years. Given its rapid development and increasing coverage worldwide, internet-based interventions seem to offer a promising option to ameliorate huge burdens brought by type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, studies conducted by different researchers have provided contradictory results on the effect of internet-based interventions in glycemic control. OBJECTIVE:This meta-analysis aims to summarize currently available evidence and evaluate the overall impact of internet-based interventions on glycemic management of type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS:A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled trials that used glycosylated hemoglobin values as the outcome measure of glycemic control were considered. Risk of bias and publication bias were evaluated. RESULTS:Of the 492 studies, 35 were included in meta-analysis, and results indicated that the weighted mean difference (WMD) between usual care and internet-based interventions at endpoint was -0.426% (95% CI -0.540 to -0.312; P<.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that intervention duration ≤3 months yielded optimal performance (WMD -0.51%; 95% CI -0.71 to -0.31; P<.001). Combined mobile and website interventions were substantially superior to solely Web-based and mobile-based interventions in glycemic control (combined WMD -0.77%, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.47; P<.001; Web only: WMD -0.48%; 95% CI -0.71 to -0.24, P<.001; mobile only WMD -0.31%, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.14; P<.001). Furthermore, the effect of interventions with automated feedbacks was similar to those with manual feedbacks, and studies with internet-based educational contents were more effective in glycemic control. The assessment revealed a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS:In conclusion, utilization of internet-based intervention is beneficial for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and taking full advantage of this type of intervention may substantially reduce the incidence of complications and improve quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION:International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42017058032; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=58032 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yY7eQNHr).

Project description:Abstract Objectives Current approved health claims in Canada, US and Europe recognize the ability of oat ß-glucan to lower blood cholesterol; however, its ability to improve glycemic control is less certain. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to update the evidence of the effect of oats and oat-fiber on markers of glycemic control in people with and without diabetes. Here we present data for the subgroup with diabetes. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through September 23rd, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials of ≥ 2-weeks of sources of oat ß-glucan and measures of glycemic control in diabetes. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias (Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 Tool). The outcomes were fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2h-plasma glucose (2h-PG) from a 75 g-oral glucose tolerance test, HbA1c and fasting plasma insulin (FPI). Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method. Heterogeneity was assessed (Cochran Q statistic) and quantified (I2 statistic). Pooled estimates were expressed as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI). GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence. Results Eligibility criteria were met by 5 trial comparisons (N = 359) in type 2 diabetes. No trials were identified in type 1 diabetes. Consumption of oat ß-glucan sources reduced FPG (MD = −0.37 mmol/L [95% CI: −0.70, −0.05 mmol/L], P = 0.03, I2 = 0.00%, PQ = 0.76) and 2h-PG (MD = −1.24 mmol/L [95% CI: −1.97, −0.51 mmol/L], P = 0.00, I2 = 0.00%, PQ = 0.56). There were non-significant reductions in HbA1c (MD = −0.12%, [95% CI: −0.26, 0.01%], P = 0.07, I2 = 0.00%, PQ = 1.00) and FPI (MD = −4.59 pmol/L, [95% CI: −14.71, 5.52 pmol/L], P = 0.37, I2 = 40.84%, PQ = 0.19). The certainty of evidence was high for 2h-PG and moderate for FPG, HbA1c and FPI (single downgrades for imprecision in each case). Conclusions Current evidence provides a good indication that consumption of oat ß-glucan results in small improvements of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. More high quality randomized trials are required to improve the precision of the pooled estimates. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04631913) Funding Sources Quaker Oats Center of Excellence, Diabetes Canada, Banting & Best Diabetes Centre, Toronto 3D foundation

Project description:BackgroundBrown rice is a whole-grain food that is often assumed to have a lower glycemic index compared to white rice. A few studies have objectively confirmed the effect of a brown-rice diet on glycemic control and metabolic parameters compared to a white-rice diet. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of brown rice on improving glycemic control and metabolic parameters in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. The researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials.MethodsPRISMA guidelines were used as the basis of this systematic review. Relevant studies were identified by searching the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), as well as Epistemonikos for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials published not later than January 2021 involving adults with prediabetes and diabetes mellitus who were consuming brown rice compared to those consuming white rice. The primary outcomes measured were glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels. The secondary outcomes were body weight, waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels, LDL and HDL-cholesterol levels. The mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between brown and white-rice-diet groups were calculated using a random-effects model.ResultsSeven trials involving 417 adults with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes were included in this study. Brown-rice diet did not improve the glycemic control because it had no effect on the HbA1c level (p = 0.15) and the FBG level (p = 0.95) compared to white-rice diet. Brown-rice diet reduced body weight (p < 0.00001; MD -2.2 kg; 95% CI [-3.13 to -1.26]; I 2 = 0%). However, it had no effect on the waist circumference (p = 0.09), systolic blood pressure (p = 0.60) and diastolic blood pressure level (p = 0.40). HDL-cholesterol level is increased in brown-rice diet (p = 0.01; MD 0.10, 95% CI [0.02 to 0.17]; I 2 = 44%) but it had no effect on the LDL-cholesterol level (p = 0.81).ConclusionsThe available evidence indicated that consuming brown rice in substitute for white rice does not affect glycemic control (HbA1c and FBG levels) in pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients. Brown rice, however, may be used as an alternative for white rice in such patients because it was found to reduce body weight and increase the HDL-cholesterol level. The benefits of a brown-rice diet on glycemic control may not be detected in short-term studies. The obtained evidence in this meta-analysis ranged from low to moderate quality. Thus, more high-quality trials with a larger sample size and a longer follow-up duration are needed to further investigate the effects of a brown-rice diet on diabetes glycemic control with stronger evidence.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019143266.

Project description:Polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) have been shown to reduce type 2 diabetes (T2DM) risk and improve insulin responsiveness in T2DM subjects, but whether the plant sources of omega-3 PUFA (alpha-linolenic acid [ALA]) have an effect on glycemic control requires further investigation.The parameters of interest were glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), fasting blood insulin (FBI), homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), fructosamine, and glycated albumin. A comprehensive search was conducted with MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ?1 month in duration that compared diets enriched in ALA with usual diets on glycemic parameters. For each study, the risk of bias as well as the study quality was assessed. Using the statistical software RevMan (v5.3), data were pooled using the generic inverse method with random effects model, and final results were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I statistic.A total of 8 trials (N?=?212) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to a control diet, a median dose of 4.4?g/day of ALA intake for a median duration of 3 months did not affect HbA1c (%) (MD?=?-.01; [95%: -.32, .31], P?=?.96). A median ALA dose of 5.4?g/day did not lower FBG (MD?=?.07; [95% CI: -.61, .76], P?=?.84) or FBI (MD?=?7.03, [95% CI: -5.84, 19.89], P?=?.28). Summary effect estimates were generally compromised by considerable and unexplained heterogeneity (I ?75%). In the subgroup analysis of continuous predictors, a reduction in HbA1c (%) and FBG (mmol/L) was significantly associated with an increased intake of ALA. Further adjustment for Publication Bias using Duval and Tweedie's trim-and-fill analysis provided an adjusted, significant MD of -.25 (95% CI: -.38, -.12; P?<.001) for HbA1c (%).ALA-enriched diets did not affect HbA1c, FBG, or FBI. The scarce number of existing RCTs and the presence of heterogeneity in our meta-analysis limit the ability to make firm conclusions about ALA in T2DM management. The potential for ALA to have dose-dependent effects warrants further research in this area.

Dataset Information

Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure