{"title":"糖尿病自我管理计划对 2 型糖尿病临床结果的比较效应：系统回顾与网络元分析","authors":"Debby Syahru Romadlon, Yu-Kang Tu, Yang-Ching Chen, Faizul Hasan, Rudy Kurniawan, Hsiao-Yean Chiu","doi":"10.1002/dmrr.3840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared the effects of various diabetes self-management programs: Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME), Diabetes Self-Management Support (DSMS), and Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched four electronic databases for eligible articles up to March 1, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of DSME, DSMS, or DSMES on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level, fasting blood glucose (FBG), total cholesterol (TC), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in adults with type 2 diabetes were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was used to assess each study quality, and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis was applied to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Data were pooled with a random-effects model under a frequentist framework.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 108 studies encompassing 17,735 participants (mean age 57.4 years) were analysed. DSMES, compared with usual care, significantly reduced HbA1c level (mean difference = −0.61%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.74 to −0.49; certainty of evidence = moderate), FBG (−23.33 mg/dL; −31.33 to −15.34; high), TC (−5.62 mg/dL; −8.69 to −2.55; high), SBP (−3.05 mmHg; −5.20 to −0.91; high), and DBP (−2.15 mmHg; −3.36 to −0.95; high). Compared with DSME, DSMES showed significantly greater improvements in HbA1c levels (−0.23%; −0.40 to −0.07; high) and DBP (−1.82 mmHg; −3.47 to −0.17; high). DSMES was ranked as the top treatment for improving diabetes clinical outcomes (0.82–0.97) in people with type 2 diabetes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>DSMES, in people with type 2 diabetes, yields the greatest improvement in the key clinical outcomes of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and blood pressure levels. Healthcare providers should incorporate the DSMES approach into their daily care routines. Approximately 30% of the studies reviewed raised some concerns about their quality, underscoring the need for high-quality studies in this area.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11335,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","volume":"40 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dmrr.3840","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effects of Diabetes Self-Management Programs on Type 2 Diabetes Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Debby Syahru Romadlon, Yu-Kang Tu, Yang-Ching Chen, Faizul Hasan, Rudy Kurniawan, Hsiao-Yean Chiu\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/dmrr.3840\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aims</h3>\\n \\n <p>This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared the effects of various diabetes self-management programs: Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME), Diabetes Self-Management Support (DSMS), and Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We searched four electronic databases for eligible articles up to March 1, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of DSME, DSMS, or DSMES on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level, fasting blood glucose (FBG), total cholesterol (TC), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in adults with type 2 diabetes were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was used to assess each study quality, and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis was applied to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Data were pooled with a random-effects model under a frequentist framework.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 108 studies encompassing 17,735 participants (mean age 57.4 years) were analysed. DSMES, compared with usual care, significantly reduced HbA1c level (mean difference = −0.61%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.74 to −0.49; certainty of evidence = moderate), FBG (−23.33 mg/dL; −31.33 to −15.34; high), TC (−5.62 mg/dL; −8.69 to −2.55; high), SBP (−3.05 mmHg; −5.20 to −0.91; high), and DBP (−2.15 mmHg; −3.36 to −0.95; high). Compared with DSME, DSMES showed significantly greater improvements in HbA1c levels (−0.23%; −0.40 to −0.07; high) and DBP (−1.82 mmHg; −3.47 to −0.17; high). DSMES was ranked as the top treatment for improving diabetes clinical outcomes (0.82–0.97) in people with type 2 diabetes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>DSMES, in people with type 2 diabetes, yields the greatest improvement in the key clinical outcomes of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and blood pressure levels. Healthcare providers should incorporate the DSMES approach into their daily care routines. Approximately 30% of the studies reviewed raised some concerns about their quality, underscoring the need for high-quality studies in this area.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11335,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews\",\"volume\":\"40 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dmrr.3840\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dmrr.3840\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dmrr.3840","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Effects of Diabetes Self-Management Programs on Type 2 Diabetes Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Aims
This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared the effects of various diabetes self-management programs: Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME), Diabetes Self-Management Support (DSMS), and Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES).
Methods
We searched four electronic databases for eligible articles up to March 1, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of DSME, DSMS, or DSMES on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level, fasting blood glucose (FBG), total cholesterol (TC), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in adults with type 2 diabetes were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was used to assess each study quality, and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis was applied to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Data were pooled with a random-effects model under a frequentist framework.
Results
A total of 108 studies encompassing 17,735 participants (mean age 57.4 years) were analysed. DSMES, compared with usual care, significantly reduced HbA1c level (mean difference = −0.61%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.74 to −0.49; certainty of evidence = moderate), FBG (−23.33 mg/dL; −31.33 to −15.34; high), TC (−5.62 mg/dL; −8.69 to −2.55; high), SBP (−3.05 mmHg; −5.20 to −0.91; high), and DBP (−2.15 mmHg; −3.36 to −0.95; high). Compared with DSME, DSMES showed significantly greater improvements in HbA1c levels (−0.23%; −0.40 to −0.07; high) and DBP (−1.82 mmHg; −3.47 to −0.17; high). DSMES was ranked as the top treatment for improving diabetes clinical outcomes (0.82–0.97) in people with type 2 diabetes.
Conclusions
DSMES, in people with type 2 diabetes, yields the greatest improvement in the key clinical outcomes of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and blood pressure levels. Healthcare providers should incorporate the DSMES approach into their daily care routines. Approximately 30% of the studies reviewed raised some concerns about their quality, underscoring the need for high-quality studies in this area.
期刊介绍：
Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews is a premier endocrinology and metabolism journal esteemed by clinicians and researchers alike. Encompassing a wide spectrum of topics including diabetes, endocrinology, metabolism, and obesity, the journal eagerly accepts submissions ranging from clinical studies to basic and translational research, as well as reviews exploring historical progress, controversial issues, and prominent opinions in the field. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in the realm of diabetes and metabolism.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
