Dataset Information

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial.

ABSTRACT: Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the optimal intervention programmes in T2D ensuring both compliance as well as long-term health outcomes. Our objective is to assess the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (the U-TURN intervention) on glycaemic control in patients with T2D. Our hypothesis is that intensive lifestyle changes are equally effective as standard diabetes care, including pharmacological treatment in maintaining glycaemic control (ie, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)) in patients with T2D. Furthermore, we expect that intensive lifestyle changes will decrease the need for antidiabetic medications.The study is an assessor-blinded, parallel group and a 1-year randomised trial. The primary outcome is change in glycaemic control (HbA1c), with the key secondary outcome being reductions in antidiabetic medication. Participants will be patients with T2D (T2D duration <10 years) without complications who are randomised into an intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) or a standard care intervention in a 2:1 fashion. Both groups will be exposed to the same standardised, blinded, target-driven pharmacological treatment and can thus maintain, increase, reduce or discontinue the pharmacological treatment. The decision is based on the standardised algorithm. The U-TURN intervention consists of increased training and basal physical activity level, and an antidiabetic diet including an intended weight loss. The standard care group as well as the U-TURN group is offered individual diabetes management counselling on top of the pharmacological treatment.This study has been approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee at the Capital Region of Denmark (H-1-2014-114). Positive, negative or inconclusive findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences.NCT02417012.

SUBMITTER: Ried-Larsen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4679918 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial.

Ried-Larsen Mathias M Christensen Robin R Hansen Katrine B KB Johansen Mette Y MY Pedersen Maria M Zacho Morten M Hansen Louise S LS Kofoed Katja K Thomsen Katja K Jensen Mette S MS Nielsen Rasmus O RO MacDonald Chris C Langberg Henning H Vaag Allan A AA Pedersen Bente K BK Karstoft Kristian K

BMJ open 20151209 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the optimal intervention programmes in T2D ensuring both compliance as well as long-term health outcomes. Our objective is to assess the effects of an intensive lifes ...[more]

PMID: 26656025

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Impaired reactive balance control can lead to increased falls in people with neurological impairments. Perturbation-based balance training (PBT), which involves repetitive exposure to destabilizing external perturbations, improves the ability to take reactive steps in older adults and individuals who have had a stroke. OBJECTIVE:The objective is to investigate whether PBT or conventional intensive balance training (CIBT) results in greater improvements in reactive stepping ability in individuals with chronic incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI). DESIGN:The design consists of an assessor-blind randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of 2 balance training programs (PBT and CIBT) matched for training duration (thrice weekly for 8 weeks). SETTING:A tertiary spinal cord injury rehabilitation center is used as the setting. PARTICIPANTS:Participants include 24 adults with iSCI classified as a C or D on the American Spinal Association Impairment Scale, who are able to stand independently and exhibit moderate trunk control. INTERVENTION:Both PBT and CIBT involve 24 sessions, each 1 hour long, of individualized static and dynamic balance tasks. However, PBT includes external, unexpected balance perturbations provided manually by the trainer at a frequency of roughly 1 per training minute. MEASUREMENTS:The primary outcome is the ability to recover balance using a single step during the Lean-and-Release test, a novel method of assessing reactive balance. Secondary outcomes include a number of clinical balance and gait assessments, and the number of falls experienced in a 6-month follow-up period. Semi-structured interviews are conducted 3 months after training completion to gain insight into the participants' perceptions of the impact of the interventions. LIMITATIONS:A control group receiving "standard care" for balance training is not included. CONCLUSIONS:This trial will provide physical therapists with insight into the efficacy of 2 forms of balance training for individuals with iSCI.

Project description:BackgroundNew targeted therapies and improved treatment strategies have dramatically improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is unknown whether different early aggressive interventions can induce stable remission or a low-active disease state that can be maintained with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) therapy, and whether they differ in efficacy and safety. The Nordic Rheumatic Diseases Strategy Trials And Registries (NORD-STAR) study will assess and compare (1) the proportion of patients who achieve remission in a head-to-head comparison between csDMARD plus glucocorticoid therapy and three different biological DMARD (bDMARD) therapies with different modes of action and (2) two de-escalation strategies in patients who respond to first-line therapy.Methods/designIn a pragmatic, 80-160-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded, phase 4 study, 800 patients with early RA (symptom duration less than 24 months) are randomized 1:1:1:1 to one of four different treatment arms: (1) aggressive csDMARD therapy with methotrexate + sulphasalazine + hydroxychloroquine + i.a. glucocorticoids (arm 1A) or methotrexate + prednisolone p.o. (arm 1B), (2) methotrexate + certolizumab-pegol, (3) methotrexate + abatacept, or (4) methotrexate + tocilizumab. The primary clinical endpoint is the proportion of patients reaching Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission at week 24. Patients in stable remission over 24 consecutive weeks enter part 2 of the study earliest after 48 weeks. Patients not achieving sustained CDAI remission over 24 consecutive weeks, exit the study after 80 weeks. In part 2, patients are re-randomized to two different de-escalation strategies, either immediate or delayed (after 24 weeks) tapering, followed by cessation of study medication. All patients remain on stable doses of methotrexate. The primary clinical endpoint in part 2 is the proportion of patients in remission (CDAI ≤2.8) 24 weeks after initiating treatment de-escalation. Radiographic assessment will be performed regularly throughout the trial, and blood and urine samples will be stored in a biobank for later biomarker analyses.DiscussionNORD-STAR is the first investigator-initiated, randomized, early RA trial to compare (1) csDMARD and three different bDMARD therapies head to head and (2) two different de-escalation strategies. The trial has the potential to identify which treatment strategy to apply in early RA to achieve the best possible outcomes for both patients and society.Trial registrationNCT01491815 and NCT02466581 . Registered on 8 December 2011 and May 2015, respectively. EudraCT: 2011-004720-35.

Project description:BackgroundPatellofemoral pain (PFP) is a common cause of knee pain in adolescents, but there are limited evidence-based treatment options for this population. Foot orthoses can improve pain and function in adults with PFP, and may be effective for adolescents. The primary aim of this study is to determine the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effects of contoured foot orthoses on knee pain severity and patient-perceived global change, compared to flat shoe insoles, in adolescents with PFP. The secondary aim is to provide an estimate of treatment effects for foot orthoses, compared to flat insoles, in adolescents with PFP.MethodsThis randomised, controlled, participant- and assessor-blinded, feasibility trial has two parallel groups. Forty adolescents (aged 12-18 years) with clinical symptoms of PFP will be recruited from Queensland, Australia. Participants will be randomised to receive either prefabricated contoured foot orthoses or flat shoe insoles. Both interventions will be fit by a physiotherapist, and worn for 3 months. Feasibility will be evaluated through assessing willingness of volunteers to enrol, number of eligible participants, recruitment rate, adherence with the study protocol, adverse effects, success of blinding, and drop-out rate. Secondary outcomes will evaluate knee-related pain, symptoms, function, quality of life, global rating of change, patient acceptable symptom state, and use of co-interventions, at 6 weeks and 3 months. Primary outcomes will be reported descriptively, while estimates of standard deviation and between-group differences (with 95% confidence intervals) will be reported for secondary outcomes.DiscussionFindings of this study will inform the feasibility of a full-scale RCT investigating the efficacy of contoured foot orthoses in adolescents with PFP. This full-scale study is necessary to improve the evidence base for management of adolescent PFP, and enhance outcomes for this population.Trial registrationACTRN12619000957190 .

Project description:BackgroundRecently, we determined that in a rigorously monitored environment an intensive diet-induced weight loss of 10% combined with exercise was significantly more effective at reducing pain in men and women with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) than either intervention alone. Compared to previous long-term weight loss and exercise trials of knee OA, our intensive diet-induced weight loss and exercise intervention was twice as effective at reducing pain intensity. Whether these results can be generalized to less intensively monitored cohorts is unknown. Thus, the policy relevant and clinically important question is: Can we adapt this successful solution to a pervasive public health problem in real-world clinical and community settings? This study aims to develop a systematic, practical, cost-effective diet-induced weight loss and exercise intervention implemented in community settings and to determine its effectiveness in reducing pain and improving other clinical outcomes in persons with knee OA.Methods/designThis is a Phase III, pragmatic, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Participants will include 820 ambulatory, community-dwelling, overweight and obese (BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2) men and women aged ≥ 50 years who meet the American College of Rheumatology clinical criteria for knee OA. The primary aim is to determine whether a community-based 18-month diet-induced weight loss and exercise intervention based on social cognitive theory and implemented in three North Carolina counties with diverse residential (from urban to rural) and socioeconomic composition significantly decreases knee pain in overweight and obese adults with knee OA relative to a nutrition and health attention control group. Secondary aims will determine whether this intervention improves self-reported function, health-related quality of life, mobility, and is cost-effective.DiscussionMany physicians who treat people with knee OA have no practical means to implement weight loss and exercise treatments as recommended by numerous OA treatment guidelines. This study will establish the effectiveness of a community program that will serve as a blueprint and exemplar for clinicians and public health officials in urban and rural communities to implement a diet-induced weight loss and exercise program designed to reduce knee pain and improve other clinical outcomes in overweight and obese adults with knee OA.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02577549 October 12, 2015.

Dataset Information

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial.

Publications

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets