Dataset Information

DIABEO App Software and Telemedicine Versus Usual Follow-Up in the Treatment of Diabetic Patients: Protocol for the TELESAGE Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Self-management of diabetes minimizes the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications, but understanding and/or adherence to self-management recommendations is often suboptimal. DIABEO is a smartphone app (downloaded via the internet) used to calculate bolus insulin doses. A previous study (TELEDIAB 1) showed that the use of DIABEO was associated with a significant improvement in glycemic control in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes mellitus, particularly when combined with teleconsultations with physicians. OBJECTIVE:Here, we present the protocol for a new study (Suivi A Grande Echelle d'une cohorte de diabétiques de type 1 et de type 2 sous schéma insulinique basal bolus par la TELEmédecine; abbreviated TELESAGE), conducted in a larger population of diabetic patients with poorly controlled basal-bolus insulin levels. METHODS:TELESAGE is a multicenter, double-randomized, open-label, three parallel-arms study, conducted in approximately 100 centers in France. The study will compare a control group (arm 1: usual follow-up) with two DIABEO telemedicine systems: (1) physician-assisted telemedicine (arm 2), and (2) nurse-assisted telemonitoring and teleconsultations by a diabetologist's task delegation (arm 3). Initial randomization will allocate the study arms in 12 French regions. A second randomization will assign patients in the groups allocated to each studied region. The primary objective of TELESAGE will be to investigate the effect of the DIABEO telemedicine system versus usual follow-up, with respect to improvements in the glycated hemoglobin levels of approximately 696 diabetic patients with poorly controlled basal-bolus insulin levels. RESULTS:The TELESAGE study is sponsored by Sanofi (Gentilly, France). A primary completion date is expected in June 2018, and publication of results is expected within 6 months of work completion. CONCLUSIONS:The TELESAGE study is expected to confirm the previous results of the TELEDIAB 1 study using a larger sample of diabetic patients. It is also expected to evaluate a nurse-assisted telemonitoring system. We will assess the potential of the DIABEO telemedicine service in terms of its utility and explore whether it can become an integral part of diabetes care for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02287532; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02287532 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ykajhJKd).

SUBMITTER: Jeandidier N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5934533 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

DIABEO App Software and Telemedicine Versus Usual Follow-Up in the Treatment of Diabetic Patients: Protocol for the TELESAGE Randomized Controlled Trial.

Jeandidier Nathalie N Chaillous Lucy L Franc Sylvia S Benhamou Pierre-Yves PY Schaepelynck Pauline P Hanaire Hélène H Catargi Bogdan B Farret Anne A Fontaine Pierre P Guerci Bruno B Reznik Yves Y Penfornis Alfred A Borot Sophie S Serusclat Pierre P Kherbachi Yacine Y D'Orsay Geneviève G Detournay Bruno B Simon Pierre P Charpentier Guillaume G

JMIR research protocols 20180419 4

<h4>Background</h4>Self-management of diabetes minimizes the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications, but understanding and/or adherence to self-management recommendations is often suboptimal. DIABEO is a smartphone app (downloaded via the internet) used to calculate bolus insulin doses. A previous study (TELEDIAB 1) showed that the use of DIABEO was associated with a significant improvement in glycemic control in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes mellitus, particular ...[more]

PMID: 29674306

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:This paper presents the protocol for an ongoing study to evaluate a telemedicine follow-up intervention for patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers. Diabetes-related foot ulcers represent challenges for patients and the health services. The large increase in the prevalence of diabetes, combined with the aging population, means that the absolute number of patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers is likely to continue to increase. Health care services therefore need to provide close clinical follow-up care for people with diabetes both in primary and specialist care. Information and communication technologies may enable more integrated treatment and care pathways across organizational boundaries. However, we lack knowledge about the effect of telemedicine follow-up and how such services can be optimally organized. OBJECTIVE:To present the design and methods of a study evaluating a telemedicine follow-up intervention for patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers. METHODS:The study is designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial (noninferiority trial) involving municipalities or municipality districts (clusters) belonging to one clinical site in Western Norway. The study includes patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes presenting with a new foot ulcer at the initial visit to the clinic. Patients in the intervention group receive telemedicine follow-up care in the community. The key ingredient in the intervention is the close integration between health care levels. The intervention is facilitated by the use of an interactive wound platform consisting of a Web-based ulcer record combined with a mobile phone, enabling counseling and communication between nurses in the community and specialist health care. Patients in the control group receive standard hospital outpatient care. The primary endpoint in the trial is healing time; secondary outcomes include amputation and death, patient-reported outcome measures, and follow-up data on the recurrence of foot ulcers. In addition, qualitative substudies are being performed to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the ongoing processes during the trial with the patients in the intervention and control groups and those health care professionals either working in primary care or in specialist care delivering the intervention. RESULTS:The project has been funded. The inclusion of patients started in September 2012. Because recruitment goals were not met in the initial period, two more clinical sites have been included to meet sample size requirements. Patient recruitment will continue until June 2016. Data collection in the qualitative substudies has been completed. CONCLUSIONS:This telemedicine trial operates in a novel setting and targets patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers during a 12-month follow-up period. The trial addresses whether integrated care using telemedicine between primary and specialist health care can be an equivalent alternative to standard outpatient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01710774; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01710774 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6im6KfFov).

Project description:Background and objectivesSurvivors of AKI are at higher risk of CKD and death, but few patients see a nephrologist after hospital discharge. Our objectives during this 2-year vanguard phase trial were to determine the feasibility of randomizing survivors of AKI to early follow-up with a nephrologist or usual care, and to collect data on care processes and outcomes.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe performed a randomized controlled trial in patients hospitalized with Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) stage 2-3 AKI at four hospitals in Toronto, Canada. We randomized patients to early nephrologist follow-up (standardized basket of care that emphasized BP control, cardiovascular risk reduction, and medication safety) or usual care from July 2015 to June 2017. Feasibility outcomes included the proportion of eligible patients enrolled, seen by a nephrologist, and followed to 1 year. The primary clinical outcome was a major adverse kidney event at 1 year, defined as death, maintenance dialysis, or incident/progressive CKD.ResultsWe screened 3687 participants from July 2015 to June 2017, of whom 269 were eligible. We randomized 71 (26%) patients (34 to nephrology follow-up and 37 to usual care). The primary reason stated for declining enrollment included hospitalization-related fatigue (n=65), reluctance to add more doctors to the health care team (n=59), and long travel times (n=40). Nephrologist visits occurred in 24 of 34 (71%) intervention participants, compared with three of 37 (8%) participants randomized to usual care. The primary clinical outcome occurred in 15 of 34 (44%) patients in the nephrologist follow-up arm, and 16 of 37 (43%) patients in the usual care arm (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.60 to 1.73).ConclusionsMajor adverse kidney events are common in AKI survivors, but we found the in-person model of follow-up posed a variety of barriers that was not acceptable to many patients.Clinical trial registry name and registration numberNephrologist Follow-up versus Usual Care after an Acute Kidney Injury Hospitalization (FUSION), NCT02483039 CJASN 16: 1005-1014, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.17331120.

Project description:BackgroundSCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months.MethodsThe study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I-III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p.Findings150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients.InterpretationSC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors.FundingVictorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.

Project description:BackgroundIn the SafeBoosC-III trial, treatment guided by cerebral oximetry monitoring for the first 72 hours after birth did not reduce the incidence of death or severe brain injury in extremely preterm infants at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age, as compared with usual care. Despite an association between severe brain injury diagnosed in the neonatal period and later neurodevelopmental disability, this relationship is not always strong. The objective of the SafeBoosC-III follow-up study is to assess mortality, neurodevelopmental disability, or any harm in trial participants at 2 years of corrected age. One important challenge is the lack of funding for local costs for a trial-specific assessment.MethodsOf the 1601 infants randomised in the SafeBoosC-III trial, 1276 infants were alive at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age and will potentially be available for the 2-year follow-up. Inclusion criteria will be enrollment in a neonatal intensive care unit taking part in the follow-up study and parental consent if required by local regulations. We aim to collect data from routine follow-up programmes between the ages of 18 and 30 months of corrected age. If no routine follow-up has been conducted, we will collect informal assessments from other health care records from the age of at least 12 months. A local co-investigator blinded to group allocation will classify outcomes based on these records. We will supplement this with parental questionnaires including the Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised. There will be two co-primary outcomes: the composite of death or moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability and mean Bayley-III/IV cognitive score. We will use a 3-tier model for prioritisation, based on the quality of data. This approach has been chosen to minimise loss to follow-up assuming that little data is better than no data at all.DiscussionFollow-up at the age of 2 years is important for intervention trials in the newborn period as only time can show real benefits and harms later in childhood. To decrease the risk of generalisation and data-driven biased conclusions, we present a detailed description of the methodology for the SafeBoosC-III follow-up study. As funding is limited, a pragmatic approach is necessary.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05134116 . Registered on 24 November 2021.

Project description:BackgroundThe traditional system of routine outpatient follow-up of chronic disease in secondary care may involve a waste of resources if patients are well. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) could support more flexible, cost-saving follow-up activities. AmbuFlex is a PRO system used in outpatient follow-up in the Central Denmark Region. PRO questionnaires are sent to patients at fixed intervals. The clinicians use the PRO data to decide whether a patient needs a visit or not (standard telePRO). PRO may make patients become more involved in their own care pathway, which may improve their self-management. Better self-management may also be achieved by letting patients initiate contact. The aim of this study is to obtain data on the effects of patient-initiated follow-up (open access telePRO) on resource utilisation, quality of care, and the patient perspective.MethodsThe study is a pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial in outpatients with epilepsy. Participants are randomly assigned to one of two follow-up activities: a) standard telePRO or b) open access telePRO. Inclusion criteria are age ≥ 15 years and previous referral to standard telePRO follow-up at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Furthermore, patients must have answered the last questionnaire via the Internet. The number of contacts will be used as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures include well-being (WHO-5 Well-Being Index), general health, number of seizures, treatment side effects, mortality, health literacy (Health Literacy Questionnaire), self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy scale), patient activation, confidence, safety, and satisfaction. In addition, the patient perspective will be explored by qualitative methods. Data will be collected at baseline and 18 month after randomisation. Inclusion of patients in the study started in January 2016. Statistical analysis will be performed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis. For qualitative data, the interpretive description strategy will be used.DiscussionThe benefits and possible drawbacks of the PRO-based open access approach will be evaluated. The present study will provide important knowledge to guide future telePRO interventions in relation to effect on resource utilisation, quality of care, and the patient perspective.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02673580 (Registration date January 28, 2016).

Project description:IntroductionPatients with systemic lupus erythematous were vulnerable to severe coronavirus disease 2019 infection and the negative impact of disrupted healthcare delivery. Telemedicine has been a popular alternative to standard in-person care during the pandemic despite the lack of evidence.MethodsThis was a 1-year pragmatic randomized-controlled trial. Patients followed at the lupus nephritis clinic were randomized to either telemedicine or standard follow-up in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the telemedicine group were followed up via videoconferencing. Standard follow-up group patients continued conventional in-person outpatient care. The primary outcome of the study was the proportion of patients in low disease activity after 1 year. Secondary outcomes included cost-of-illness, safety, and various patient-reported outcomes.ResultsFrom 6/2020 to 12/2021, 144 patients were randomized and 141 patients (telemedicine: 70, standard follow-up: 71) completed the study. At 1 year, 80.0% and 80.2% of the patients in the telemedicine group and standard follow-up group were in lupus low disease activity state or complete remission, respectively (p = 0.967). Systemic lupus erythematous disease activity indices, number of flares and frequency of follow-ups were also similar. There were no differences in the cost-of-illness, quality of life or mental health scores. However, significantly more patients in the telemedicine group (41.4% vs 5.6%; p < 0.001) required switch of mode of follow-up and higher proportion of them had hospitalization during the study period (32.9% vs 15.5%; p = 0.016). Being in the telemedicine group or not in low disease activity at baseline were the independent predictors of hospitalization (odds ratio: 2.6; 95% confidence interval: 1.1-6.1, odds ratio: 2.7, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-6.7, respectively) in the post hoc analysis.ConclusionsIn patients with systemic lupus erythematous, telemedicine predominant follow-up resulted in similar 1-year disease control compared to standard care. However, it needed to be complemented by in-person visits, especially in patients with unstable disease.

Dataset Information

DIABEO App Software and Telemedicine Versus Usual Follow-Up in the Treatment of Diabetic Patients: Protocol for the TELESAGE Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

DIABEO App Software and Telemedicine Versus Usual Follow-Up in the Treatment of Diabetic Patients: Protocol for the TELESAGE Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets