Dataset Information

Process- and Outcome-Based Financial Incentives to Improve Self-Management and Glycemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes in Singapore: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sub-optimally controlled diabetes increases risks for adverse and costly complications. Self-management including glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and exercise are key for optimal glycemic control, yet, poor self-management remains common.

Objective

The main objective of the Trial to Incentivize Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD) study was to determine the effectiveness of financial incentives in improving glycemic control among type 2 diabetes patients in Singapore, and to test whether process-based incentives tied to glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and physical activity are more effective than outcome-based incentives tied to achieving normal glucose readings.

Methods

TRIAD is a randomized, controlled, multi-center superiority trial. A total of 240 participants who had at least one recent glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) being 8.0% or more and on oral diabetes medication were recruited from two polyclinics. They were block-randomized (blocking factor: current vs. new glucometer users) into the usual care plus (UC +) arm, process-based incentive arm, and outcome-based incentive arm in a 2:3:3 ratio. The primary outcome was the mean change in HbA1c at month 6 and was linearly regressed on binary variables indicating the intervention arms, baseline HbA1c levels, a binary variable indicating titration change, and other baseline characteristics.

Results

Our findings show that the combined incentive arms trended toward better HbA1c than UC + , but the difference is estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.67 to 0.06). Lending credibility to this result, the proportion of participants who reduced their HbA1c is higher in the combined incentive arms relative to UC + (0.18; 95% CI 0.04, 0.31). We found a small improvement in process- relative to outcome-based incentives, but this was again estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.05; 95% CI - 0.42 to 0.31). Consistent with this improvement, process-based incentives were more effective at improving weekly medication adherent days (0.64; 95% CI - 0.04 to 1.32), weekly physically active days (1.37; 95% CI 0.60-2.13), and quality of life (0.04; 95% CI 0.0-0.07) than outcome-based incentives.

Conclusion

This study suggests that both incentive types may be part of a successful self-management strategy. Process-based incentives can improve adherence to intermediary outcomes, while outcome-based incentives focus on glycemic control and are simpler to administer.

SUBMITTER: Bilger M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8357673 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe objectives of this systematic review are to identify studies that assess the effectiveness of patient-directed financial incentive interventions to improve asthma management behaviours, determine overall effectiveness of financial incentives, identify design characteristics of effective interventions and assess the impact on longer-term outcomes in the context of asthma.DesignSystematic review with narrative synthesis.Data sourcesElectronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed and Web of Science) and grey literature sources (NHS Digital, CORE, ProQuest, Clinical Trials Register and EU Clinical Trials Register) were searched in November 2021 and updated March 2023.Eligiblity criteriaEligible articles assessed financial incentives to improve asthma management behaviours (attendance at appointments, medication adherence, tobacco smoke/allergen exposure, inhaler technique and asthma education) for patients with asthma or parents/guardians of children with asthma. Eligible study design included randomised controlled, controlled or quasi-randomised trials and retrospective/prospective cohort, case-controlled or pilot/feasibility studies.SynthesisA narrative synthesis was conducted; eligible studies were grouped by asthma management behaviours and financial incentive framework domains.ResultsWe identified 4268 articles; 8 met the inclusion criteria. The studies were from the USA (n=7) and the UK (n=1). Asthma management behaviours included attendance at appointments (n=4), reduction in smoke exposure (n=1) and medication adherence (n=3). Five studies demonstrated positive behaviour change, four of which were significant (attendance at appointments (n=3) showed significant differences between intervention and control: 73% and 49% in one study, 46.3% and 28.9% in another, and 35.7% and 18.9%, respectively; medication adherence (n=1) showed significant change from 80% during intervention to 33% post intervention). These four significant studies used 'positive gain', 'certain', 'fixed' financial incentives of smaller magnitude, given for 'all' instances of behaviour.ConclusionThere is some evidence that patient-directed financial incentives improve asthma management behaviours. However, in view of the wide heterogeneity in study design and measured outcomes, determining overall effectiveness was challenging.Prospero registration numberCRD42021266679.

Project description:Background: Given the increase in financial-incentive programs nationwide, many physicians and physician groups are concerned about potential unintended consequences of providing financial incentives to improve quality of care. However, few studies examine whether actual unintended consequences result from providing financial incentives to physicians. We sought to document the extent to which the unintended consequences discussed in the literature were observable in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of financial incentives.Methods: We conducted a qualitative observational study nested within a larger RCT of financial incentives to improve hypertension care. We conducted 30-minute telephone interviews with primary care personnel at facilities participating in the RCT housed at12 geographically dispersed Veterans Affairs Medical Centers nationwide. Participants answered questions about unintended effects, clinic team dynamics, organizational impact on care delivery, study participation. We employed a blend of inductive and deductive qualitative techniques for analysis.Participants: Sixty-five participants were recruited from RCT enrollees and personnel not enrolled in the larger RCT, plus one primary care leader per site.Results: Emergent themes included possible patient harm, emphasis on documentation over improving care, reduced professional morale, and positive spillover. All discussions of unintended consequences involving patient harm were only concerns, not actual events. Several unintended consequences concerned ancillary initiatives for quality improvement (e.g., practice guidelines and performance measurement systems) rather than financial incentives.Conclusions: Many unintended consequences of financial incentives noted were either only concerns or attributable to ancillary quality-improvement initiatives. Actual unintended consequences included improved documentation of care without necessarily improving actual care, and positive unintended consequences.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00302718.

Project description:Financial incentives are utilised in healthcare systems in a number of countries to improve quality of care delivered to patients by rewarding practices or practitioners for achieving set targets.To systematically review the evidence investigating the impact of financial incentives for implementation of supported self-management on quality of care including: organisational process outcomes, individual behavioural outcomes, and health outcomes for individuals with asthma or diabetes; both conditions with an extensive evidence base for self-management.We followed Cochrane methodology, using a PICOS search strategy to search eight databases in November 2015 (updated May 2017) including a broad range of implementation methodologies. Studies were weighted by robustness of methodology, number of participants and the quality score. We used narrative synthesis due to heterogeneity of studies.We identified 2,541 articles; 12 met our inclusion criteria. The articles were from the US (n = 7), UK (n = 4) and Canada (n = 1). Measured outcomes were HbA1c tests undertaken and/or the level achieved (n = 10), written action plans for asthma (n = 1) and hospital/emergency department visits (n = 1). Three of the studies were part of a larger incentive scheme including many conditions; one focused on asthma; eight focussed on diabetes. In asthma, the proportion receiving 'perfect care' (including providing a written action plan) increased from 4% to 88% in one study, and there were fewer hospitalisations/emergency department visits in another study. Across the diabetes studies, quality-of-care/GP performance scores improved in three, were unchanged in six and deteriorated in one.Results for the impact of financial incentives for the implementation of self-management were mixed. The evidence in diabetes suggests no consistent impact on diabetic control. There was evidence from a single study of improved process and health outcomes in asthma. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and understand the process by which financial incentives may impact (or not) on care.Protocol registration number: CRD42016027411.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is prevalent in Singapore and is a major risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and increased health care costs. Strategies to lower blood pressure include lifestyle modifications and home blood pressure monitoring. Nonetheless, adherence to home blood pressure monitoring remains low. This protocol details an algorithm for remote management of primary care patients with hypertension.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine whether wireless home blood pressure monitoring with or without financial incentives is more effective at reducing systolic blood pressure than nonwireless home blood pressure monitoring (usual care).MethodsThis study was designed as a randomized controlled open-label superiority study. A sample size of 224 was required to detect differences of 10 mmHg in average systolic blood pressure. Participants were to be randomized, in the ratio of 2:3:3, into 1 of 3 parallel study arms :(1) usual care, (2) wireless home blood pressure monitoring, and (3) wireless home blood pressure monitoring with financial incentives. The primary outcome was the mean change in systolic blood pressure at month 6. The secondary outcomes were the mean reduction in diastolic blood pressure, cost of financial incentives, time taken for the intervention, adherence to home blood pressure monitoring, effectiveness of the framing of financial incentives in decreasing nonadherence to blood pressure self-monitoring and the adherence to antihypertensive medication at month 6.ResultsThis study was approved by SingHealth Centralised Institutional Review Board and registered. Between January 24, 2018 and July 10, 2018, 42 participants (18.75% of the required sample size) were enrolled, and 33 participants completed the month 6 assessment by January 31, 2019.ConclusionsDue to unforeseen events, the study was stopped prematurely; therefore, no results are available. Depending on the blood pressure information received from the patients, the algorithm can trigger immediate blood pressure advice (eg, Accident and Emergency department visit advice for extremely high blood pressure), weekly feedback on blood pressure monitoring, medication titration, or skipping of routine follow-ups. The inclusion of financial incentives framed as health capital provides a novel idea on how to promote adherence to remote monitoring, and ultimately, improve chronic disease management.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03368417; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03368417.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/27496.