Effect of applying a diabetes risk score on lifestyle counselling and shared decision-making in primary care: A pragmatic cluster randomised trial.

Esther Seidel-Jacobs, Fiona Kohl, Joachim Rosenbauer, Matthias B Schulze, Oliver Kuss, Wolfgang Rathmann
{"title":"Effect of applying a diabetes risk score on lifestyle counselling and shared decision-making in primary care: A pragmatic cluster randomised trial.","authors":"Esther Seidel-Jacobs, Fiona Kohl, Joachim Rosenbauer, Matthias B Schulze, Oliver Kuss, Wolfgang Rathmann","doi":"10.1016/j.pcd.2024.12.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>There is a lack of studies on the impact of diabetes risk scores on diabetes prevention. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of applying a non-invasive diabetes risk score as component of routine health checks on counselling intensity and shared decision-making (SDM) in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cluster randomised trial, in which primary care physicians (n = 30) enrolled participants (n = 315) with statutory health insurance without known diabetes, ≥ 35 years of age with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27.0 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. In the intervention group, the German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS) was applied as add-on to the standard routine health check. Outcomes were length and intensity of the counselling interview and the process of SDM. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using mixed models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the intervention group, higher odds were found for a more intensive counselling interview regarding physical activity, healthy diet and body weight (e.g., participants` perspective: odds ratios between 1.8 and 2.5) compared to controls. Analysis of total SDM score showed a more participative counselling interview in the intervention than in the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GDRS use in routine primary care improves intensity of lifestyle counselling and process of SDM already in people with moderate diabetes risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":94177,"journal":{"name":"Primary care diabetes","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary care diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2024.12.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: There is a lack of studies on the impact of diabetes risk scores on diabetes prevention. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of applying a non-invasive diabetes risk score as component of routine health checks on counselling intensity and shared decision-making (SDM) in primary care.

Methods: Cluster randomised trial, in which primary care physicians (n = 30) enrolled participants (n = 315) with statutory health insurance without known diabetes, ≥ 35 years of age with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27.0 kg/m2. In the intervention group, the German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS) was applied as add-on to the standard routine health check. Outcomes were length and intensity of the counselling interview and the process of SDM. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using mixed models.

Results: In the intervention group, higher odds were found for a more intensive counselling interview regarding physical activity, healthy diet and body weight (e.g., participants` perspective: odds ratios between 1.8 and 2.5) compared to controls. Analysis of total SDM score showed a more participative counselling interview in the intervention than in the control group.

Conclusions: GDRS use in routine primary care improves intensity of lifestyle counselling and process of SDM already in people with moderate diabetes risk.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
应用糖尿病风险评分对初级保健生活方式咨询和共同决策的影响:一项实用的集群随机试验。
目的:目前缺乏糖尿病风险评分对糖尿病预防影响的研究。本研究的目的是调查应用非侵入性糖尿病风险评分作为常规健康检查的组成部分对初级保健咨询强度和共同决策(SDM)的影响。方法:聚类随机试验,初级保健医生(n = 30)入组参与者(n = 315),有法定健康保险,已知无糖尿病,年龄≥ 35岁,体重指数(BMI)≥ 27.0 kg/m2。在干预组,德国糖尿病风险评分(GDRS)作为标准常规健康检查的补充。结果是咨询访谈的长度和强度以及SDM的过程。采用意向治疗混合模型进行分析。结果:在干预组中,与对照组相比,在身体活动、健康饮食和体重方面进行更深入的咨询访谈的几率更高(例如,参与者的观点:比值比在1.8和2.5之间)。SDM总分分析显示,干预组的咨询访谈参与性高于对照组。结论:在常规初级保健中使用GDRS可以提高中等糖尿病风险人群生活方式咨询的强度和SDM的过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Investigation of food cravings in individuals with type 2 diabetes: A hierarchical regression analysis. Shoulder pain among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: A cross-sectional study in Chilean population. Targeting depression and diabetes comorbidity: A generalization meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on cognitive-behavioural therapy efficacy. Erectile dysfunction and diabetes mellitus. Factors influencing the uptake of culturally tailored diabetes self-management education and support programmes among ethnic minority patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1