Dataset Information

Preventing Diabetes Distress in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Results 1 Year After Participation in the STePS Program.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim is to report 1-year outcomes of the Supporting Teens Problem Solving (STePS) study, a randomized controlled trial comparing a distress and depression prevention program with a diabetes education program for adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Research design and methods

With 264 adolescents in two locations (Chicago and San Francisco Bay Area), a randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing the Penn Resilience Program for type 1 diabetes (PRP T1D) to Advanced Diabetes Education. Interventions lasted 4.5 months, and assessments were conducted at baseline, and 4.5, 8, 12, and 16 months. Outcomes of interest were diabetes distress (DD), depressive symptoms, resilience, diabetes self-management, and glycemic control. Latent growth curve modeling was used to test between-group differences over time.

Results

Results indicate that there was acceptable randomization and exposure to interventions, and that exposure to PRP T1D was associated with substantial reductions in DD. In addition, stable glycemic control, resilience characteristics, and depressive symptoms were observed 1 year post-treatment. Diabetes management deteriorated in both groups.

Conclusions

Intervening before symptoms of psychological distress start can prevent the development of the DD commonly seen in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. The STePS program represents a promising prevention program, and future reports on 2- and 3-year outcomes will explore benefits over longer periods of time.

SUBMITTER: Hood KK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6054495 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe major efficacy trials on diabetes prevention have used resource-intensive approaches to identify high-risk individuals and deliver lifestyle interventions. Such strategies are not feasible for wider implementation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a peer-support lifestyle intervention in preventing type 2 diabetes among high-risk individuals identified on the basis of a simple diabetes risk score.Methods and findingsThe Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program was a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in 60 polling areas (clusters) of Neyyattinkara taluk (subdistrict) in Trivandrum district, Kerala state, India. Participants (age 30-60 years) were those with an Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) ?60 and were free of diabetes on an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). A total of 1,007 participants (47.2% female) were enrolled (507 in the control group and 500 in the intervention group). Participants from intervention clusters participated in a 12-month community-based peer-support program comprising 15 group sessions (12 of which were led by trained lay peer leaders) and a range of community activities to support lifestyle change. Participants from control clusters received an education booklet with lifestyle change advice. The primary outcome was the incidence of diabetes at 24 months, diagnosed by an annual OGTT. Secondary outcomes were behavioral, clinical, and biochemical characteristics and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A total of 964 (95.7%) participants were followed up at 24 months. Baseline characteristics of clusters and participants were similar between the study groups. After a median follow-up of 24 months, diabetes developed in 17.1% (79/463) of control participants and 14.9% (68/456) of intervention participants (relative risk [RR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.16, p = 0.36). At 24 months, compared with the control group, intervention participants had a greater reduction in IDRS score (mean difference: -1.50 points, p = 0.022) and alcohol use (RR 0.77, p = 0.018) and a greater increase in fruit and vegetable intake (?5 servings/day) (RR 1.83, p = 0.008) and physical functioning score of the HRQoL scale (mean difference: 3.9 score, p = 0.016). The cost of delivering the peer-support intervention was US$22.5 per participant. There were no adverse events related to the intervention. We did not adjust for multiple comparisons, which may have increased the overall type I error rate.ConclusionsA low-cost community-based peer-support lifestyle intervention resulted in a nonsignificant reduction in diabetes incidence in this high-risk population at 24 months. However, there were significant improvements in some cardiovascular risk factors and physical functioning score of the HRQoL scale.Trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611000262909.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisAn increased risk of fracture with canagliflozin vs placebo was reported from the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program, with heterogeneity of findings identified between the two trials that comprise the CANVAS Program, CANVAS and CANVAS-R. The objective of these analyses was to identify reasons for the possibly different effects on fracture observed between CANVAS and CANVAS-R.MethodsThis study was an analysis of two highly similar trials, CANVAS and CANVAS-R, conducted in 10,142 individuals with type 2 diabetes and history or high risk of cardiovascular disease who received canagliflozin (pooled 100/300 mg once daily) or placebo. Outcomes assessed in this analysis were effects on adjudicated fractures overall and by type, location, association with a fall, dose and follow-up time.ResultsA total of 496 participants recorded ≥1 fracture event during follow-up (15.40 vs 11.93 per 1000 patient-years with canagliflozin vs placebo; HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.04, 1.52]). There was significant heterogeneity in the effects on fracture (p = 0.005) between CANVAS (n = 4330: HR 1.55 [95% CI 1.21, 1.97]) and CANVAS-R (n = 5812: HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.62, 1.19]). The between-study heterogeneity in fracture risk was not clearly explained by differences in baseline characteristics, interactions of randomised treatment with participant characteristics, dose effects, duration of follow-up, metabolic effects, adverse events related to falls or adverse events possibly causing falls.Conclusions/interpretationThere was no evidence to explain clearly the fracture risk observed in the CANVAS Program or the heterogeneity in fracture risk between the two studies. The recently reported null result for fracture in the Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE) trial suggests that the observed association in CANVAS is likely to be a chance finding, although an unidentified fall-related mechanism remains a possibility.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01032629, NCT01989754.