Cluster randomized controlled trial of a peer support program for people with diabetes: study protocol for the Australasian peers for progress study

BMC Public Health

Brian Oldenburg⁵  Pilvikki Absetz³  Virginia Hagger²  James Dunbar⁶  Stephen Colgan⁴  Rory Wolfe⁵  Carla Renwick⁵  Michaela A Riddell¹ 

[1] Research Fellow, International Public Health Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia;Diabetes Australia – Vic, Melbourne, Australia;National Institute of Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland;Deakin Health Economics, Population Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia;School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia;Greater Green Triangle University Department of Rural Health, Flinders University and Deakin University, Warrnambool, Australia

关键词: Support group;    Self-management;    Diabetes;    Peer support;   

Others  :  1163020
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-12-843

 received in 2012-09-24, accepted in 2012-09-27,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Well managed diabetes requires active self-management in order to ensure optimal glycaemic control and appropriate use of available clinical services and other supports. Peer supporters can assist people with their daily diabetes self-management activities, provide emotional and social support, assist and encourage clinical care and be available when needed.

Methods

A national database of Australians diagnosed with type 2 diabetes is being used to invite people in pre-determined locations to participate in community-based peer support groups. Peer supporters are self-identified from these communities. All consenting participants receive diabetes self-management education and education manual prior to randomization by community to a peer support intervention or usual care. This multi-faceted intervention comprises four interconnected components for delivering support to the participants. (1) Trained supporters lead 12 monthly group meetings. Participants are assisted to set goals to improve diabetes self-management, discuss with and encourage each other to strengthen linkages with local clinical services (including allied health services) as well as provide social and emotional support. (2) Support through regular supporter-participant or participant-participant contact, between monthly sessions, is also promoted in order to maintain motivation and encourage self-improvement and confidence in diabetes self-management. (3) Participants receive a workbook containing diabetes information, resources and community support services, key diabetes management behaviors and monthly goal setting activity sheets. (4) Finally, a password protected website contains further resources for the participants. Supporters are mentored and assisted throughout the intervention by other supporters and the research team through attendance at a weekly teleconference. Data, including a self-administered lifestyle survey, anthropometric and biomedical measures are collected on all participants at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is change in cardiovascular disease risk using the UKPDS risk equation. Secondary outcomes include biomedical, quality of life, psychosocial functioning, and other lifestyle measures. An economic evaluation will determine whether the program is cost effective.

Discussion

This manuscript presents the protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of group-based peer support for people with type 2 diabetes in a community setting. Results from this trial will contribute evidence about the effectiveness of peer support in achieving effective self-management of diabetes.

Trial registration number

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR); ACTRN12609000469213

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Riddell et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Victoria's Diabetes Epidemic 10 years on: Key facts and points of interest from NDSS dataset. http://www.diabetesepidemic.org.au/assets/documents/Key_facts.pdf webcite
• [2]AIHW: Diabetes Prevalence in Australia: detailed estimates for 2007–08. In Diabetes Series No 17. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra; 2011.
• [3]AIHW: Diabetes: Australian facts 2008. In Diabetes series no8. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra; 2008.
• [4]Colagiuri S, Colagiuri R, Conway B, Davey P, Grainger D: Diabcost Australia: Assessing the burden of type 2 diabetes in Australia. In Australian Diabetes Educators Association. The Australian Centre for Diabetes Strategies; Diabetes Australia; M-TAG and Eli Lilly Australia, Adelaide; 2002.
• [5]Gaster B, Hirsch IB: The effects of improved glycemic control on complications in type 2 diabetes. Arch Intern Med 1998, 158(2):134-140.
• [6]Brownson CA, Heisler M: The role of peer support in diabetes care and self-management. The Patient 2009, 2(1):5-17.
• [7]Dennis C: Peer support within a health care context: a concept analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2003, 40(3):321-332.
• [8]World Health Organization: Peer Support Program in Diabetes. Report of a WHO consultation. 5-7 November 2007. WHO Press, Geneva; 2008. available at: http://www.who.int/diabetes/publications/Diabetes_final_13_6.pdf webcite
• [9]Foster G, Taylor SJ, Eldridge SE, Ramsay J, Griffiths CJ: Self-management education programmes by lay leaders for people with chronic conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 4:CD005108.
• [10]Peers for Progress: Peer Suppport Around the World: Diabetes. http://www.peersforprogress.org/ webcite
• [11]Boothroyd RI, Fisher EB: Peers for progress: promoting peer support for health around the world. Fam Pract 2010, 27(Suppl 1):i62-i68.
• [12]Fisher EB, Earp JA, Maman S, Zolotor A: Cross-cultural and international adaptation of peer support for diabetes management. Fam Pract 2010, 27(Suppl 1):i6-i16.
• [13]Fisher EB, Brownson CA, O'Toole ML, Anwuri VV: Ongoing follow-up and support for chronic disease management in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Diabetes Initiative. Diabetes Educ 2007, 33(Suppl 6):201S-207S.
• [14]Fisher EB, Boothroyd RI, Coufal MM, Baumann LC, Mbanya JC, Rotheram-Borus MJ, Sanguanprasit B, Tanasugarn C: Peer Support For Self-Management Of Diabetes Improved Outcomes In International Settings. Health Aff 2012, 31(1):130-139.
• [15]Hider K: An evaluation of the Community Network Program (COMNET), Diabetes Australia-Victoria. Hider Health Evaluation and Consulting, Melbourne; 2005.
• [16]Stevens RJ, Kothari V, Adler AI, Stratton IM: The UKPDS risk engine: a model for the risk of coronary heart disease in Type II diabetes (UKPDS 56). Clin Sci (Lond) 2001, 101(6):671-679.
• [17]Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D: CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med 2010, 7(3):e1000251.
• [18]Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG: CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004, 328(7441):702-708.
• [19]National Diabetes Sevices Scheme. http://www.ndss.com.au/ webcite
• [20]Diabetes Epidemic in Victoria. http://www.diabetesvic.org.au/media-centre/diabetes-epidemic webcite
• [21]Section 3: Guide to Physical Measurements (Step 2) In WHO STEPS Surveillance Manual - Updated: 13 June 2008. World Health Organization Department of Chronic Diseases and Health Promotion, Geneva; 2008.
• [22]Hodge A, Patterson AJ, Brown WJ, Ireland P, Giles G: The Anti Cancer Council of Victoria FFQ: relative validity of nutrient intakes compared with weighed food records in young to middle-aged women in a study of iron supplementation. Aust N Z J Public Health 2000, 24(6):576-583.
• [23]Macera CA, Ham SA, Jones DA, Kimsey CD, Ainsworth BE, Neff LJ: Limitations on the use of a single screening question to measure sedentary behavior. Am J Public Health 2001, 91(12):2010-2012.
• [24]Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE: The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care 2000, 23(7):943-950.
• [25]Morisky DE, Ang A, Krousel-Wood M, Ward HJ: Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2008, 10(5):348-354.
• [26]Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM: Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care 1986, 24(1):67-74.
• [27]Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R: The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 1999, 8(3):209-224.
• [28]Kind P: The EuroQol instrument: An index of health related quality of life. 2nd edition. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia; 1996.
• [29]Rabin R, de Charro F: EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001, 33(5):337-343.
• [30]Fisher L, Glasgow RE, Mullan JT, Skaff MM, Polonsky WH: Development of a brief diabetes distress screening instrument. Ann Fam Med 2008, 6(3):246-252.
• [31]Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Earles J, Dudl RJ, Lees J, Mullan J, Jackson RA: Assessing psychosocial distress in diabetes: development of the diabetes distress scale. Diabetes Care 2005, 28(3):626-631.
• [32]Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB: The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001, 16(9):606-613.
• [33]Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ: Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med 2004, 36(8):588-594.
• [34]Tang TS, Brown MB, Funnell MM, Anderson RM: Social support, quality of life, and self-care behaviors among African Americans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2008, 34(2):266-276.
• [35]DKT; Diabetes Research and Training Center: Michigan Diabetes Research and Training Center’s Brief Diabetes Knowledge Test. University of Michigan; 1998. available at http://www.med.umich.edu/mdrtc/profs/documents/svi/dkt5answers.pdf webcite
• [36]Stanford Patient Education Research Centre: Self Efficacy for Diabetes. Stanford Patient Education Research Centre, Palo Alto, CA; available at http://patienteducation.stanford.edu/research/sediabetes.pdf webcite
• [37]Manual General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ) version 2.1. http://www.gpaq.info/GPAQmanualV2_1.pdf webcite
• [38]Glasgow RE, Wagner EH, Schaefer J, Mahoney LD, Reid RJ, Greene SM: Development and validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC). Med Care 2005, 43(5):436-444.
• [39]McCormack LA, Williams-Piehota PA, Bann CM, Burton J, Kamerow DB, Squire C, Fisher E, Brownson CA, Glasgow RE: Development and validation of an instrument to measure resources and support for chronic illness self-management: a model using diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2008, 34(4):707-718.
• [40]Glasgow RE, Whitesides H, Nelson CC, King DK: Use of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) with diabetic patients: relationship to patient characteristics, receipt of care, and self-management. Diabetes Care 2005, 28(11):2655-2661.
• [41]Wan Q, Harris MF, Jayasinghe UW, Flack J, Georgiou A, Penn DL, Burns JR: Quality of diabetes care and coronary heart disease absolute risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Australian general practice. Qual Saf Health Care 2006, 15(2):131-135.
• [42]Glasgow RE, Nelson CC, Strycker LA, King DK: Using RE-AIM metrics to evaluate diabetes self-management support interventions. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30(1):67-73.
• [43]Fisher EB, Brownson CA, O'Toole ML, Shetty G, Anwuri VV, Glasgow RE: Ecological approaches to self-management: the case of diabetes. Am J Public Health 2005, 95(9):1523-1535.
• [44]Clarke PM, Gray AM, Briggs A, Farmer AJ, Fenn P, Stevens RJ, Matthews DR, Stratton IM, Holman RR: A model to estimate the lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes: the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model (UKPDS no. 68). Diabetologia 2004, 47(10):1747-1759.