4.7 Article

Online Diabetes Self-Management Program A randomized study

Journal

DIABETES CARE
Volume 33, Issue 6, Pages 1275-1281

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc09-2153

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [1R18DK065729]
  2. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation [096223]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE - We hypothesized that people with type 2 diabetes in an online diabetes self-management program, compared with usual-care control subjects, would 1) demonstrate reduced A1C at 6 and 18 months, 2) have fewer symptoms, 3) demonstrate increased exercise, and 4) have improved self-efficacy and patient activation. In addition, participants randomized to listserve reinforcement would have better 18-month outcomes than participants receiving no reinforcement. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - A total of 761 participants were randomized to 1) the program, 2) the program with e-mail reinforcement, or 3) were usual-care control subjects (no treatment). This sample included 110 American Indians/Alaska Natives (Al/ANs). Analyses of covariance models were used at the 6- and 18-month follow-up to compare groups. RESULTS - At 6 months, A1C, patient activation, and self-efficacy were improved for program participants compared with usual care control subjects (P < 0.05). There were no changes in other health or behavioral indicators. The Al/AN program participants demonstrated improvements in health distress and activity limitation compared with usual-care control subjects. The subgroup with initial A1C >7% demonstrated stronger improvement in A1C (P = 0.01). At 18 months, self-efficacy and patient activation were improved for program participants. A1C was not measured. Reinforcement showed no improvement. CONCLUSIONS - An online diabetes self-management program is acceptable for people with type 2 diabetes. Although the results were mixed they suggest 1) that the program may have beneficial effects in reducing A1C, 2) Al/AN populations can be engaged in and benefit from online interventions, and 3) our follow-up reinforcement appeared to have no value.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available