Dataset Information

Psychosocial Interventions and Wellbeing in Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: A number of studies, including systematic reviews, show beneficial effects of psychosocial interventions for people with diabetes mellitus; however, they have not been assessed using meta-analysis. The purpose of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials is to investigate the effects of psychosocial interventions on depressive and anxiety symptoms, quality of life and self-efficacy in individuals with diabetes mellitus. Methods: The databases Pubmed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and SocINDEX were searched with no year restriction. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials published in English that included individuals diagnosed with diabetes mellitus, aged 18 years or above, who engaged in a psychosocial intervention, with outcome measures addressing depressive or anxiety symptomology, quality of life or self-efficacy. Eligible studies needed to compare the intervention to usual care. Study selection was completed using Covidence and meta-analysis was undertaken using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Results: Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Five studies investigated the effects of psychosocial interventions and showed a medium to large benefit for depressive symptoms (SMD: -0.70; CI: -1.27, -0.13) which persisted at follow up (SMD: -1.54, CI: -2.97, -0.12). Similar results were not seen immediately post-intervention in the three studies that assessed anxiety symptoms (SMD: -0.30; CI: -0.69, 0.10); however, a medium beneficial effect was seen at follow up (SMD = -0.61, CI = -0.92 to -0.31). Small benefits were seen in the three studies assessing quality of life outcomes (SMD: 0.30, CI: 0.06, 0.55). No benefit was seen in the two studies assessing self-efficacy (SMD: 0.23, CI: -0.11, 0.57). Conclusions: The results of the current study provide preliminary evidence that psychosocial interventions, compared to usual care, reduce depressive symptoms, and may improve quality of life in individuals with diabetes. However, only a few studies were included and the clinical significance of these findings is unknown.

SUBMITTER: Pascoe MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5723413 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychosocial Interventions and Wellbeing in Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Pascoe Michaela C MC Thompson David R DR Castle David J DJ Jenkins Zoe M ZM Ski Chantal F CF

Frontiers in psychology 20171205

<b>Purpose:</b> A number of studies, including systematic reviews, show beneficial effects of psychosocial interventions for people with diabetes mellitus; however, they have not been assessed using meta-analysis. The purpose of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials is to investigate the effects of psychosocial interventions on depressive and anxiety symptoms, quality of life and self-efficacy in individuals with diabetes mellitus. <b>Methods:</b> The databases Pubmed, MEDLINE, CINA ...[more]

PMID: 29259563

Similar Datasets

Project description:Diabetes distress (DD) disproportionately affects vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and interventions targeting this population are therefore relevant. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the evidence for an effect of psychosocial interventions for reducing DD, and, secondly HbA1c, depression, and health-related quality of life in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Vulnerability encompasses poor glycemic control (HbA1c >7.5%) and at least one additional risk factor for poor diabetes outcomes such as low educational level, comorbidity, and risky lifestyle behavior. The interventions should be theoretically founded and include cognition- or emotion-focused elements. We systematically searched four databases for articles published between January 1995 and March 2018. Eighteen studies testing a variety of psychosocial interventions in 4,066 patients were included. We adhered to the Cochrane methodology and PRISMA guidelines. Review Manager 5.3 was used for data extraction and risk of bias assessment, and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation for assessing the quality of the evidence. Data were pooled using the fixed or random effects method as appropriate. We investigated effects of individual vs group, intensive vs brief interventions, and interventions with and without motivational interviewing in subgroup analyses. To assess the robustness of effect estimates, sensitivity analyses excluding studies with high risk of bias and attrition >20% were conducted. We found low to moderate quality evidence for a significant small effect of psychosocial interventions on DD, and very low to moderate quality evidence for no effect on HbA1c, both outcomes assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up. The effect on depression was small, while there was no effect on health-related quality of life. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that interventions using motivational interviewing and individual interventions were associated with incremental effects on DD. Likewise, intensive interventions were associated with significant reductions in both DD and HbA1c.

Project description:IntroductionDespite the recent global mental health movement of the transition from hospital-centred to integrated community-based services, comprehensive evidence of psychosocial interventions focusing on community-dwelling individuals with schizophrenia is still lacking. To overcome this gap in the current knowledge, we will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of all types of psychosocial interventions for community-dwelling (non-hospitalised) individuals with schizophrenia when compared with non-active control conditions (eg, treatment as usual).Methods and analysisThis study protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. By March 2022, the following sources will have been searched, without restrictions for language or publication period: Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will also try to identify other potentially eligible studies by searching the reference lists of included studies, other relevant systematic reviews and grey literature. All relevant randomised controlled trials from both high-income and low-income to middle-income countries will be allowed. Two independent reviewers will conduct the selection/screening of studies, data extraction and methodological quality assessment of included studies. The primary outcomes are quality of life and psychiatric hospital admission. Standard pairwise meta-analyses with a random-effects model will be conducted. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomised Trials. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to assess the quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study. The study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations as well as peer-reviewed publications.Prospero registration numberCRD42021266187.

Project description:BackgroundEffective management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is essential because it is one of the most prevalent diseases during pregnancy, and the consequent condition maternal hyperglycemia is closely related to considerable short- and long-term maternal and neonatal complications. Web-based interventions (WBIs), defined as therapeutic interventions offered via the web, have been implemented to assist in managing GDM owing to their advantages of high accessibility and efficiency, but findings across relevant studies are inconsistent.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of WBIs on glycemic control among pregnant women with GDM; examine whether specific types of intervention interactivity, format, and technology have beneficial effects on maternal glycemic control; and comprehensively assess the efficacy of WBIs in maternal behavioral outcomes, cognitive and attitudinal outcomes, mental health, maternal and neonatal clinical outcomes, and medical service use and costs among pregnant women with GDM.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from their respective inception to November 19, 2022, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool. Where possible, the data for all outcomes were meta-analyzed using the Stata software (version 12.0; StataCorp). Overall, 3 subgroup analyses and post hoc sensitivity analyses of maternal glycemic control parameters were performed.ResultsOverall, 25 publications arising from 21 randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were included. The overall meta-analyses on glycemic control parameters demonstrated that WBIs could significantly improve fasting blood glucose (standardized mean difference=-1.764, 95% CI -2.972 to -0.557; P=.004) and 2-hour postprandial blood glucose (standardized mean difference=-1.433, 95% CI -2.561 to -0.304; P=.01) compared with the control group, whereas no significant effect was found on glycated hemoglobin and 1-hour postprandial blood glucose. The results of the subgroup analyses indicated that mobile app-delivered interventions with a personalized format and interactive function showed more beneficial effects on maternal glycemic control. Moreover, WBIs could significantly enhance compliance with the self-monitoring of blood glucose; increase the rate of normal vaginal delivery; and decrease the chance of emergency cesarean, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, and composite neonatal complications. GDM knowledge, risk perception of the disease, self-efficacy, satisfaction with care, and medical service use of the participants in the WBI group were also improved compared with the control group. However, the effectiveness of WBIs on other secondary outcomes was either nonsignificant or uncertain.ConclusionsWBIs are a promising approach to GDM management. Personalized, interactive, and mobile app-delivered interventions seem more worthy of being recommended for future clinical practice. Further high-quality studies are required to verify these findings before making broad recommendations.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022296625; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=296625.

Project description:BackgroundThe proliferation of digital technology has the potential to transform diabetes management. One of the critical aspects of modern diabetes management remains the achievement of glycemic targets to avoid acute and long-term complications.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe the landscape of evidence pertaining to the relative effectiveness or efficacy and safety of various digital interventions for the self-management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with a primary focus on reducing glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels.MethodsA systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted by searching Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL on April 5, 2022. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Eligibility criteria for the SLR included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies evaluating interventions containing both human (eg, coaching) and digital components (eg, glucose meter) in adult patients with T2DM. The primary meta-analysis was restricted to studies that reported laboratory-measured HbA1c. In secondary analyses, meta-regression was performed with the intensity of coaching in the digital intervention as a categorical covariate.ResultsIn total, 28 studies were included in this analysis. Most studies (23/28, 82%) used the reduction of HbA1c levels as the primary end point, either directly or as a part of a multicomponent outcome. In total, 21 studies reported statistically significant results with this primary end point. When stratified into 3 intervention categories by the intensity of the intervention supporting the digital health technology (analyzing all 28 studies), the success rate appeared to be proportional to the coaching intensity (ie, higher-intensity studies reported higher success rates). When the analysis was restricted to RCTs using the comparative improvement of HbA1c levels, the effectiveness of the interventions was less clear. Only half (12/23, 52%) of the included RCTs reported statistically significant results. The meta-analyses were broadly aligned with the results of the SLR. The primary analysis estimated a greater reduction in HbA1c associated with digital interventions compared with usual care (-0.31%, 95% CI -0.45% to -0.16%; P<.001). Meta-regression estimated reductions of -0.45% (95% CI -0.81% to -0.09%; P=.02), -0.29% (95% CI -0.48% to -0.11%; P=.003), and -0.28% (95% CI -0.65% to 0.09%; P=.20) associated with high-, medium-, and low-intensity interventions, respectively.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that reducing HbA1c levels in individuals with T2DM with the help of digital interventions is feasible, effective, and acceptable. One common feature of effective digital health interventions was the availability of timely and responsive personalized coaching by a dedicated health care professional.

Dataset Information

Psychosocial Interventions and Wellbeing in Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Psychosocial Interventions and Wellbeing in Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets