Dataset Information

Early Outcomes From the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess weight and HbA1c changes in the Healthier You: National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP), the largest DPP globally to achieve universal population coverage. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:A service evaluation assessed intervention effectiveness for adults with nondiabetic hyperglycemia (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol [6.0-6.4%] or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) between program launch in June 2016 and December 2018, using prospectively collected, national service-level data in England. RESULTS:By December 2018, 324,699 people had been referred, 152,294 had attended the initial assessment, and 96,442 had attended at least 1 of 13 group-based intervention sessions. Allowing sufficient time to elapse, 53% attended an initial assessment, 36% attended at least one group-based session, and 19% completed the intervention (attended >60% of sessions). Of the 32,665 who attended at least one intervention session and had sufficient time to finish, 17,252 (53%) completed: intention-to-treat analyses demonstrated a mean weight loss of 2.3 kg (95% CI 2.2, 2.3) and an HbA1c reduction of 1.26 mmol/mol (1.20, 1.31) (0.12% [0.11, 0.12]); completer analysis demonstrated a mean weight loss of 3.3 kg (3.2, 3.4) and an HbA1c reduction of 2.04 mmol/mol (1.96, 2.12) (0.19% [0.18, 0.19]). Younger age, female sex, Asian and black ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and normal baseline BMI were associated with less weight loss. Older age, female sex, black ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and baseline overweight and obesity were associated with a smaller HbA1c reduction. CONCLUSIONS:Reductions in weight and HbA1c compare favorably with those reported in recent meta-analyses of pragmatic studies and suggest likely future reductions in participant type 2 diabetes incidence.

SUBMITTER: Valabhji J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7115827 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Early Outcomes From the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.

Valabhji Jonathan J Barron Emma E Bradley Dominique D Bakhai Chirag C Fagg Jamie J O'Neill Simon S Young Bob B Wareham Nick N Khunti Kamlesh K Jebb Susan S Smith Jenifer J

Diabetes care 20191112 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess weight and HbA<sub>1c</sub> changes in the Healthier You: National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP), the largest DPP globally to achieve universal population coverage.<h4>Research design and methods</h4>A service evaluation assessed intervention effectiveness for adults with nondiabetic hyperglycemia (HbA<sub>1c</sub> 42-47 mmol/mol [6.0-6.4%] or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) between program launch in June 2016 and December 2018, using p ...[more]

PMID: 31719054

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe National Health Service diabetes prevention programme in England, (NHS DPP) aims to identify people at high risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and offer them a face-to-face, group-based, behaviour change intervention for at least 9 months. The NHS DPP was rolled out in phases. We aimed to elicit stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of the factors influencing implementation of, and participation in, the programme during the development phase.MethodsIndividual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 50 purposively sampled stakeholders: service users (n =?20); programme commissioners (n =?7); referrers (n =?8); and intervention deliverers (n =?15). Topic guides were structured using a pragmatic, theory-informed approach. Analysis employed the framework method.ResultsWe identified factors that influenced participation: Risk communication at referral - stakeholders identified point of referral as a window of opportunity to offer brief advice, to provide an understanding of T2D risk and information about the programme; Perceived impact of the NHS DPP - service users highlighted the positive perceived impact on their behaviour change, the peer support provided by participating in the programme, the option to involve a relative, and the 'knock on' effect on others. Service users also voiced disappointment when blood test results still identified them at high risk after the programme; and Behavioural maintenance - participants highlighted the challenges linked to behavioural maintenance (e.g. discontinuation of active support). Factors influencing implementations were also identified: Case finding - stakeholders suggested that using community involvement to identify service users could increase reach and ensure that the workload was not solely on GP practices; Adaptability: intervention deliverers acknowledged the need to tailor advice to service users' preferences and needs; Accountability - the need to acknowledge who was responsible for what at different stages of the NHS DPP pathway; and Fidelity - stakeholders described procedures involved in monitoring service users' satisfaction, outcome data collection and quality assurance assessments.ConclusionsThe NHS DPP offers an evidence-informed behavioural intervention for T2D prevention. Better risk communication specification could ensure consistency at the referral stage and improve participation in the NHS DPP intervention. Cultural adaptations and outreach strategies could ensure the NHS DPP contributes to reducing health inequalities.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus is preventable through lifestyle intervention. Diabetes prevention programmes (DPPs) aim to deliver prevention-based behaviour change interventions to reduce incidence. Such programmes vary from usual primary care in terms of where, how, and by whom they are delivered. Implementation is therefore likely to face new commissioning, incentive and delivery challenges. We report on the implementation of a national DPP in NHS England, and identify lessons learned in addressing the implementation challenges.MethodsIn 2017/18, we conducted 20 semi-structured telephone interviews covering 16 sampled case sites with the designated lead(s) responsible for local implementation of the programme. Interviews explored the process of implementation, including organisation of the programme, expectations and attitudes to the programme, funding, target populations and referral and clinical pathways. We drew on constant comparative methods to analyse the data and generate over-arching themes. We complemented our qualitative data with a survey focused on variation in the financial incentives used across sites to ensure usual primary care services recruited patients to new providers.ResultsWe identified five over-arching areas of learning for implementing this large-scale programme: 1) managing new providers; 2) promoting awareness of services; 3) recruiting patients; 4) incentive payments; and 5) mechanisms for sharing learning. In general, tensions appeared to be caused by a lack of clear roles/responsibilities between hierarchical actors, and lack of communication. Both local sites and the national NHS coordination team gained experience through learning by doing. Initial tensions with roles and expectations have been worked out during implementation.ConclusionsImplementing a national disease prevention programme is a major task, and one that will be increasingly faced by health systems globally as they aim to adjust to demand pressures. We provide practical learning opportunities for the wider uptake and sustainability of prevention programmes. Future implementers might wish to define clear responsibilities for each actor prior to implementation, ensure early engagement with new providers, offer mechanisms/forums for sharing learning, generate evidence and provide advice on incentive payments, and prioritise public and professional awareness of the programme.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) is a nine-month, group-based behavioural intervention for adults in England at risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. Four independent providers were commissioned to deliver versions of the NHS-DPP, in line with NHS England specifications. This observational study maps NHS-DPP delivery in routine practice against the NHS specification, and compares service delivery with observed patient experiences. METHODS:Researchers observed service delivery across eight complete NHS-DPP courses (118 sessions, median 14 sessions per course), consenting 455 participants (36 staff, 398 patients, 21 accompanying persons). Key features of NHS-DPP delivery were described using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) framework. Researchers wrote detailed field notes during each session, including observations of patient experience. Field notes were content analysed; instances of positive and negative experiences were labelled and grouped into categories. Researchers used a novel method of comparing observed patient experiences to variations in programme delivery. RESULTS:Delivery broadly followed NHS England's specification and the plans set out by providers. Deviations included the scheduling and larger group sizes in some sessions. There was variation in the type and format of activities delivered by providers. Positive patient experiences included engagement, satisfaction with the programme, good within-group relationships and reported behavioural changes. Negative experiences included poor scheduling, large groups, and dissatisfaction with the venue. Where more interactive and visual activities were delivered in smaller groups of 10-15 people with good rapport, there were generally more instances of positive patient experiences, and where there were structural issues such as problems with the scheduling of sessions, poor venues and inadequate resources, there tended to be more negative patient experiences. CONCLUSIONS:Addressing issues that we have identified as being linked to negative experiences with the NHS-DPP could increase uptake, reduce patient drop-out and increase the overall effectiveness of the programme. In particular, modifying structural aspects of the NHS-DPP (e.g. reliable session scheduling, reducing group sizes, enough session resources) and increasing interaction appear particularly promising for improving these outcomes.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Evaluation of the demonstrator phase and first wave roll-out of the National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Programme (DPP) in England. To examine: (1) intervention design, provision and fidelity assessment procedures; (2) risk assessment and recruitment pathways and (3) data collection for monitoring and evaluation. To provide recommendations informing decision makers on programme quality, improvements and future evaluation. DESIGN:We reviewed programme documents, mapping against the NHS DPP specification and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) public health guideline: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) prevention in people at high risk (PH38), conducted qualitative research using individual interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders and examined recruitment, fidelity and data collection procedures. SETTING:Seven NHS DPP demonstrator sites and, subsequently, 27 first wave areas across England. INTERVENTIONS:Intensive behavioural intervention with weight loss, diet and physical activity goals. The national programme specifies at least 13 sessions over 9?months, delivered face to face to groups of 15-20 adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia, mainly recruited from primary care and NHS Health Checks. PARTICIPANTS:Participants for qualitative research were purposively sampled to provide a spread of stakeholder experience. Documents for review were provided via the NHS DPP Management Group. FINDINGS:The NHS DPP specification reflected current evidence with a clear framework for service provision. Providers, with national capacity to deliver, supplied intervention plans compliant with this framework. Stakeholders highlighted limitations in fidelity assessment and recruitment and retention challenges, especially in reach and equity, that could adversely impact on implementation. Risk assessment for first wave eligibility differed from NICE guidance. CONCLUSIONS:The NHS DPP provides an evidence-based behavioural intervention for prevention of T2D in adults at high risk, with capacity to deliver nationally. Framework specification allows for balance between consistency and contextual variation in intervention delivery, with session details devolved to providers. Limitations in fidelity assurance, data collection procedures and recruitment issues could adversely impact on intervention effectiveness and restrict evaluation.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Primary Care Networks (PCNs) are a new organisational hierarchy with wide-ranging responsibilities introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) Long Term Plan. The vision is that PCNs should represent 'natural' communities of general practices (GP practices) collaborating at scale and covering a geography that fits well with practices, other healthcare providers and local communities. Our study aims to identify natural communities of GP practices based on patient registration patterns using Markov Multiscale Community Detection, an unsupervised network-based clustering technique to create catchments for these communities. DESIGN:Retrospective observational study using Hospital Episode Statistics - patient-level administrative records of attendances to hospital. SETTING:General practices in the 32 Clinical Commissioning Groups of Greater London PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients resident in and registered to a GP practice in Greater London that had one or more outpatient encounters at NHS hospitals between 1st April 2017 and 31st March 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The allocation of GP practices in Greater London to PCNs based on the registrations of patients resident in each Lower Layer Super Output Area (LSOA) of Greater London. The population size and coverage of each proposed PCN. RESULTS:3 428 322 unique patients attended 1334 GPs in 4835 LSOAs in Greater London. Our model grouped 1291 GPs (96.8%) and 4721 LSOAs (97.6%) into 165 mutually exclusive PCNs. Median PCN list size was 53 490, with a lower quartile of 38 079 patients and an upper quartile of 72 982 patients. A median of 70.1% of patients attended a GP within their allocated PCN, ranging from 44.6% to 91.4%. CONCLUSIONS:With PCNs expected to take a role in population health management and with community providers expected to reconfigure around them, it is vital to recognise how PCNs represent their communities. Our method may be used by policymakers to understand the populations and geography shared between networks.

Dataset Information

Early Outcomes From the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.

Publications

Early Outcomes From the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure