Background
People who are prescribed self-administered medications typically take less than half the prescribed doses. Efforts to assist patients with adherence to medications might improve the benefits of prescribed medications, but also might increase their adverse effects.

Objectives
To update a review summarizing the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to help patients follow prescriptions for medications for medical problems, including mental disorders but not addictions.

Search methods
We updated searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), PsycINFO (all via OVID) and Sociological Abstracts (via CSA) in January 2007 with no language restriction. We also reviewed bibliographies in articles on patient adherence and articles in our personal collections, and contacted authors of relevant original and review articles.

Selection criteria
Articles were selected if they reported an unconfounded RCT of an intervention to improve adherence with prescribed medications, measuring both medication adherence and treatment outcome, with at least 80% follow-up of each group studied and, for long-term treatments, at least six months follow-up for studies with positive initial findings.

Data collection and analysis
Study design features, interventions and controls, and results were extracted by one review author and confirmed by at least one other review author. We extracted adherence rates and their measures of variance for all methods of measuring adherence in each study, and all outcome rates and their measures of variance for each study group, as well as levels of statistical significance for differences between study groups, consulting authors and verifying or correcting analyses as needed. The studies differed widely according to medical condition, patient population, intervention, measures of adherence, and clinical outcomes. Therefore, we did not feel that quantitative analysis was scientifically justified; rather, we conducted a qualitative analysis.

Main results
For short-term treatments, four of ten interventions reported in nine RCTs showed an effect on both adherence and at least one clinical outcome, while one intervention reported in one RCT significantly improved patient adherence, but did not enhance the clinical outcome. For long-term treatments, 36 of 83 interventions reported in 70 RCTs were associated with improvements in adherence, but only 25 interventions led to improvement in at least one treatment outcome. Almost all of the interventions that were effective for long-term care were complex, including combinations of more convenient care, information, reminders, self-monitoring, reinforcement, counseling, family therapy, psychological therapy, crisis intervention, manual telephone follow-up, and supportive care. Even the most effective interventions did not lead to large improvements in adherence and treatment outcomes.

Authors' conclusions
For short-term treatments several quite simple interventions increased adherence and improved patient outcomes, but the effects were inconsistent from study to study with less than half of studies showing benefits. Current methods of improving adherence for chronic health problems are mostly complex and not very effective, so that the full benefits of treatment cannot be realized. High priority should be given to fundamental and applied research concerning innovations to assist patients to follow medication prescriptions for long-term medical disorders.

Interventions for enhancing medication adherence.

OBJECTIVE —To systematically review the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS —MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Nursing and Allied Health databases were searched for English-language articles published between 1980 and 1999. Studies were original articles reporting the results of randomized controlled trials of the effectiveness of self-management training in people with type 2 diabetes. Relevant data on study design, population demographics, interventions, outcomes, methodological quality, and external validity were tabulated. Interventions were categorized based on educational focus (information, lifestyle behaviors, mechanical skills, and coping skills), and outcomes were classified as knowledge, attitudes, and self-care skills; lifestyle behaviors, psychological outcomes, and quality of life; glycemic control; cardiovascular disease risk factors; and economic measures and health service utilization. RESULTS —A total of 72 studies described in 84 articles were identified for this review. Positive effects of self-management training on knowledge, frequency and accuracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose, self-reported dietary habits, and glycemic control were demonstrated in studies with short follow-up ( CONCLUSIONS —Evidence supports the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes, particularly in the short term. Further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of self-management interventions on sustained glycemic control, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and ultimately, microvascular and cardiovascular disease and quality of life.

/pdf/effectiveness-of-self-management-training-in-type-2-diabetes-soglcnmoad.pdf

Effectiveness of Self-Management Training in Type 2 Diabetes: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of self-management education on GHb in adults with type 2 diabetes. Research design and methods We searched for English language trials in Medline (1980-1999), Cinahl (1982-1999), and the Educational Resources Information Center database (ERIC) (1980-1999), and we manually searched review articles, journals with highest topic relevance, and reference lists of included articles. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials that were published in the English language, tested the effect of self-management education on adults with type 2 diabetes, and reported extractable data on the effect of treatment on GHb. A total of 31 studies of 463 initially identified articles met selection criteria. We computed net change in GHb, stratified by follow-up interval, tested for trial heterogeneity, and calculated pooled effects sizes using random effects models. We examined the effect of baseline GHb, follow-up interval, and intervention characteristics on GHb. Results On average, the intervention decreased GHb by 0.76% (95% CI 0.34-1.18) more than the control group at immediate follow-up; by 0.26% (0.21% increase - 0.73% decrease) at 1-3 months of follow-up; and by 0.26% (0.05-0.48) at > or = 4 months of follow-up. GHb decreased more with additional contact time between participant and educator; a decrease of 1% was noted for every additional 23.6 h (13.3-105.4) of contact. Conclusions Self-management education improves GHb levels at immediate follow-up, and increased contact time increases the effect. The benefit declines 1-3 months after the intervention ceases, however, suggesting that learned behaviors change over time. Further research is needed to develop interventions effective in maintaining long-term glycemic control.

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/25/7/1159.full.pdf

Self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the effect on glycemic control

Diabetes self-management education (DSME) is a critical element of care for all people with diabetes and is necessary in order to improve patient outcomes. The National Standards for DSME are designed to define quality diabetes self-management education and to assist diabetes educators in a variety of settings to provide evidence-based education. Because of the dynamic nature of health care and diabetes-related research, these Standards are reviewed and revised approximately every 5 years by key organizations and federal agencies within the diabetes education community.

A Task Force was jointly convened by the American Association of Diabetes Educators and the American Diabetes Association in the summer of 2006. Additional organizations that were represented included the American Dietetic Association, the Veteran's Health Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Indian Health Service, and the American Pharmaceutical Association. Members of the Task Force included a person with diabetes; several health services researchers/behaviorists, registered nurses, and registered dietitians; and a pharmacist.

The Task Force was charged with reviewing the current DSME standards for their appropriateness, relevance, and scientific basis. The Standards were then reviewed and revised based on the available evidence and expert consensus. The committee convened on 31 March 2006 and 9 September 2006, and the Standards were approved 25 March 2007.

Diabetes self-management education (DSME) is the ongoing process of facilitating the knowledge, skill, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care. This process incorporates the needs, goals, and life experiences of the person with diabetes and is guided by evidence-based standards. The overall objectives of DSME are to support informed decision-making, self-care behaviors, problem-solving and active collaboration with the health care team and to improve clinical outcomes, health status, and quality of life.

Before the review of the individual Standards, the Task Force identified overriding principles based on existing evidence that would …

/pdf/national-standards-for-diabetes-self-management-education-2tec6l36is.pdf

National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education

CAROLÉ MENSING, RN, MA, CDE (TASK FORCE CHAIR) JACKIE BOUCHER, MS, RD, LD, CDE MARJORIE CYPRESS, MS, C-ANP, CDE KATIE WEINGER, EDD, RN KATHRYN MULCAHY, MSN, RN, CDE PATRICIA BARTA, RN, MPH, CDE GWEN HOSEY, MS, ARNP, CDE WENDY KOPHER, RN, C, CDE, HTP ANDREA LASICHAK, MS, RD, CDE BETTY LAMB, RN, MSN MAVOURNEEN MANGAN, RN, MS, ANP, C, CDE JAN NORMAN, RD, CDE JON TANJA, BS, MS, RPH LINDA YAUK, MS, RD, LD, CDE KIMBERLYDAWN WISDOM, MD, MS CYNTHIA ADAMS, PHD

Two interactive computer-based systems have been evaluated: a teaching program with text and animated graphics and a multiple-choice knowledge-assessment program (KAP) with optional prescriptive feedback. One hundred seventy-four routine-attending insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) patients were allocated to active and control groups to determine the effect of these programs on knowledge and control after a 4- to 6-mo follow-up period. Interactive computer teaching (ICT) resulted in a significant knowledge increment in both IDDM and NIDDM patients (P less than .05), together with a mean fall of 0.8 and 0.7%, respectively, in HbA1c (P less than .05 and P greater than .1), but no changes were observed in respective control groups. The KAP with feedback also produced a significant knowledge increment in both IDDM and NIDDM patients (P less than .05), of similar magnitude to the ICT program, and a mean fall in HbA1c of 1.2 and 1.3%, respectively (P less than .05), with no changes in the corresponding control groups. Even when KAP was used without prescriptive feedback, smaller but significant mean falls in HbA1c of 0.7 and 0.8% (P less than .05) were seen in IDDM and NIDDM patients, respectively, suggesting a motivational effect resulting from program participation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Effect of computer-based learning on diabetes knowledge and control.

Knowledge about diabetes was assessed using a previously described interactive computer-based questionnaire in 79 patients with insulin-dependent (IDDM) and 72 with non-insulin-dependent (NIDDM) diabetes mellitus routinely attending a single diabetic clinic. Simple linear correlation of total knowledge score with glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) showed no significant relationship for either IDDM (r = 0.12: p = 0.18) or NIDDM (r = 0.15: p = 0.1). However, quintile grouping of knowledge scores showed the mean HbA1c to be significantly higher in the lowest scoring NIDDM quintile (10.6 +/- 0.5: +/- SE) with respect to the pooled mean of all the higher scoring quintiles (9.0 +/- 0.3) (p = 0.027). Mean HbA1c (9.6 +/- 0.5) was also higher in the least knowledgeable IDDM quintile than any other quintile group (range 8.8-9.0) but this was not significant with respect to the pooled mean of higher scoring patients (p greater than 0.1). The mean age of the lowest scoring IDDM quintile group (60.5 +/- 13.9 years) was significantly higher (p less than 0.01) than higher scoring IDDM groups (mean age range 36.5-43.3 years) but age was not significantly related to HbA1c in IDDM subjects. IDDM showed greater knowledge of diabetes than NIDDM but ignorance in key areas was unacceptably high in both diabetic subtypes, indicating that regular knowledge assessment and educational reinforcement may be essential for good diabetic control as well as patient safety, particularly in older IDDM patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

S. Farrant

Papers

Effect of computer-based learning on diabetes knowledge and control.

Knowledge profile and control in diabetic patients.