Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on body weight in people at high risk of type 2 diabetes referred to the English NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Valabhji J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8412796 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimsThe English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) is commissioned by NHS England and has been rolled out across England to adults identified as being at high risk of type 2 diabetes. The present scoping review aimed to identify the extent and nature of evidence to date on the NHS DPP and describe what the evidence has reported.MethodsA scoping review involving searches of various sources (including MEDLINE, CINAHL, MediArXiv, Google Scholar and GreyLit) was conducted on 31 August 2021 and repeated on 09 February 2022. Only articles reporting on the NHS DPP made available since 2015 were eligible for inclusion.Results65 articles were included. Of these, 37 were journal publications. Most articles were made available in 2018 and 2020 (total n = 25). The majority of articles reported on uptake and retention (n = 27) whilst others reported on implementation considerations (n = 24), programme outcomes (n = 21), stakeholder experience (n = 8) and screening and referral processes (n = 3). Various research methods were reported and included qualitative (n = 9) and document analysis (n = 8). Articles revealed preliminary evidence on service user characteristics, rates of referral, uptake and retention as well as how far the NHS DPP is being delivered in line with its evidence base and service specification.ConclusionsThe evidence is accumulating on NHS DPP uptake and retention most, with emerging evidence on programme outcomes (such as weight loss and HbA1c). More evidence is warranted on stakeholder experience to decipher how to overcome low initial and long-term engagement reported by the current evidence base.
| S-EPMC9321029 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe prevention of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a major concern for health services around the world. The English NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) offers a group face-to-face behaviour change intervention, based around exercise and diet, to adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH), referred from primary care. Previous analysis of the first 100,000 referrals revealed just over half of those referred to the NHS-DPP took up a place. This study aimed to identify the demographic, health and psychosocial factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake to help inform the development of interventions to improve uptake and address inequities between population groups.MethodsDrawing on the Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization we developed a survey questionnaire to collect data on a wide range of demographic, health and psychosocial factors that might influence uptake of the NHS-DPP. We distributed this questionnaire to a cross-sectional random sample of 597 patients referred to the NHS-DPP across 17 general practices, chosen for variation. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake.Results325 out of 597 questionnaires were completed (54%). Only a third of responders took up the offer of a place. The best performing model for uptake (AUC = 0.78) consisted of four factors: older age; beliefs concerning personal vulnerability to T2DM; self-efficacy for reducing T2DM risk; and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP. After accounting for these, demographic and health-related factors played only a minor role.ConclusionUnlike fixed demographic characteristics, psychosocial perceptions may be amenable to change. NHS-DPP uptake rates may be improved by targeting the beliefs of patients about their risk of developing T2DM, their ability to carry out and sustain behaviours to reduce this risk, and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP in providing the necessary understanding and skills required. The recently introduced digital version of the NHS DPP could help address the even lower uptake amongst younger adults. Such changes could facilitate proportional access from across different demographic strata.
| S-EPMC10091609 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5855311 | biostudies-other
Project description:AimsTo assess weight change in the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) delivered via video conferencing (remote) sessions or delivered via specific digital interventions through apps or websites, during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to group-based face-to-face interventions, pre-pandemic.MethodsProspectively collected national service-level data relating to individuals with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0%-6.4%) or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) referred to the NHS DPP from June 2016 to March 2022.ResultsBetween March 2020 and March 2022, 335,961 people were referred to the programme and were offered a choice of remote or digital intervention. This was preceded by 556,793 people referred to the face-to-face programme between June 2016 and February 2022. Uptakes to intervention sessions were 47% for those offered a choice and 39% for face-to-face. Remote and digital participants were significantly younger (60 and 56 vs. 65 years) and heavier (86.1 kg and 91.0 kg vs. 84.1 kg) compared to face-to-face. Weight change was assessed for 42,407 remote, 7699 digital and 97,205 face-to-face participants with sufficient time to have finished the programme and no missing data. Mean weight losses for participants attending at least one intervention session were: 2.40 (2.36-2.44) kg, 2.59 (2.49-2.68) kg and 2.01 (1.98-2.04) kg for remote, digital and face-to-face participants respectively. Corresponding mean weight losses for those who completed the programme were: 3.24 (3.19-3.30) kg, 4.76 (4.60-4.92) kg and 3.04 (3.00-3.07) kg. There were no significant differences in weight change between interventions by ethnicity and deprivation.ConclusionsWeight losses achieved through remote and digital interventions were greater than those previously achieved through face-to-face interventions, without evidence of exacerbation of health inequalities.
| S-EPMC9878108 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC7115827 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7694420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo assess fidelity of the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP), a behavioural intervention for people in England at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes, to the specified programme features.MethodsDocument analysis of the NHS-DPP programme specification, including National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) PH38 diabetes prevention guidance. This was compared with the intervention design (framework response documents and programme manuals) from all four independent providers delivering the NHS-DPP. Documents were coded using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication framework (describing service parameters) and the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1.ResultsProviders demonstrated good fidelity to service parameters of the NHS-DPP. The NHS-DPP specification indicated 19 unique behaviour change techniques. Framework responses for the four providers contained between 24 and 32 distinct behaviour change techniques, and programme manuals contained between 23 and 45 distinct behaviour change techniques, indicating variation in behaviour change content between providers' intervention documents. Thus, each provider planned to deliver 74% of the unique behaviour change techniques specified, and a large amount of behaviour change content not mandated.ConclusionsThere is good fidelity to the specified service parameters of the NHS-DPP; however, the four providers planned to deliver approximately three-quarters of behaviour change techniques specified by the NHS-DPP. Given that behaviour change techniques are the 'active ingredients' of interventions, and some of these techniques in the programme manuals may be missed in practice, this highlights possible limitations with fidelity to the NHS-DPP programme specification at the intervention design stage.
| S-EPMC7496858 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The National Health Service Digital Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DDPP) is a behavioural intervention for adults in England at risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, rolled out nationally via independent providers and their digital partners. The NHS England programme specification indicated 19 behaviour change techniques (BCTs) which should be present in the intervention, including BCTs to support self-regulation. A previous evaluation of the face-to-face service found an under-delivery of some self-regulatory BCTs. This study assessed whether those 19 BCTs were offered in the different interventions delivered by four digital providers. A cross-sectional analysis of BCT content in the NHS-DDPP was elicited from the following sources: (a) online platforms (e.g. apps), (b) educational materials, and (c) health coaching (assessed via interviews with health coaches and audio-recorded telephone consultations). All materials were coded using the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1. A total of 17, 15, 15 and 14 of the 19 specified BCTs were identified across the four digital provider programmes. A mean proportion of 43% of specified BCTs were present via providers' apps, 74% via educational materials, and 62% via health coaching. An additional 41 BCTs were included in at least one of the four providers' programmes. Fidelity of BCT content in the NHS-DDPP was better than previously identified for the face-to-face DPP service. However, BCTs were offered via multiple modalities, thus the degree to which users engage with the modalities will impact on their exposure to BCTs and likely effectiveness of the digital programme.
| S-EPMC9876742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExcess weight and unhealthy behaviours (e.g. sedentariness, high alcohol) are common amongst women including those attending breast screening. These factors increase the risk of breast cancer and other diseases. We tested the feasibility and acceptability of a weight loss/behaviour change programme framed to reduce breast cancer risk (breast cancer prevention programme, BCPP) compared to one framed to reduce risk of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes (T2D) (multiple disease prevention programme, MDPP).MethodsWomen aged 47-73 years with overweight or obesity (n = 1356) in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) were randomised (1:2) to be invited to join a BCPP or a MDPP. The BCPP included personalised information on breast cancer risk and a web and phone weight loss/behaviour change intervention. The MDPP also included an NHS Health Check (lipids, blood pressure, HbA1c and personalised feedback for risk of CVD [QRISK2] and T2D [QDiabetes and HbA1c]). Primary outcomes were uptake and retention and other feasibility outcomes which include intervention fidelity and prevalence of high CVD and T2D risk. Secondary outcomes included change in weight.ResultsThe BCPP and MDPP had comparable rates of uptake: 45/508 (9%) vs. 81/848 (10%) and 12-month retention; 33/45 (73%) vs. 53/81 (65%). Both programmes had a high fidelity of delivery with receipt of mean (95% CI) 90 (88-98% of scheduled calls, 91 (86-95%) of scheduled e-mails and 89 (76-102) website entries per woman over the 12-month period. The MDPP identified 15% of women with a previously unknown 10-year CVD QRISK2 of ≥ 10% and 56% with 10-year Qdiabetes risk of ≥ 10%. Both groups experienced good comparable weight loss: BCPP 26/45 (58%) and MDPP 46/81 (57%) with greater than 5% weight loss at 12 months using baseline observation carried forward imputation.ConclusionsBoth programmes appeared feasible. The MDPP identified previously unknown CVD and T2D risk factors but does not appear to increase engagement with behaviour change beyond a standard BCPP amongst women attending breast screening. A future definitive effectiveness trial of BCPP is supported by acceptable uptake and retention, and good weight loss.Trial registrationISRCTN91372184 , registered 28 September 2014.
| S-EPMC8690875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) has been delivered by four commercial organizations across England, to prevent people with impaired glucose tolerance developing Type 2 diabetes. Evidence reviews underpinning the NHS-DPP design specification identified 19 Behavior Change Techniques (BCTs) that are the intervention "active ingredients." It is important to understand the discrepancies between BCTs specified in design and BCTs actually delivered.PurposeTo compare observed fidelity of delivery of BCTs that were delivered to (a) the NHS-DPP design specification, and (b) the programme manuals of four provider organizations.MethodsAudio-recordings were made of complete delivery of NHS-DPP courses at eight diverse sites (two courses per provider organization). The eight courses consisted of 111 group sessions, with 409 patients and 35 facilitators. BCT Taxonomy v1 was used to reliably code the contents of NHS-DPP design specification documents, programme manuals for each provider organization, and observed NHS-DPP group sessions.ResultsThe NHS-DPP design specification indicated 19 BCTs that should be delivered, whereas only seven (37%) were delivered during the programme in all eight courses. By contrast, between 70% and 89% of BCTs specified in programme manuals were delivered. There was substantial under-delivery of BCTs that were designed to improve self-regulation of behavior, for example, those involving problem solving and self-monitoring of behavior.ConclusionsA lack of fidelity in delivery to the underlying evidence base was apparent, due to poor translation of design specification to programme manuals. By contrast, the fidelity of delivery to the programme manuals was relatively good. Future commissioning should focus on ensuring the evidence base is more accurately translated into the programme manual contents.
| S-EPMC8557367 | biostudies-literature