Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21455729›Full record

Trial reportDiabetologia2011

The effect of motivational interviewing on glycaemic control and perceived competence of diabetes self-management in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus after attending a group education programme: a randomised controlled trial.

L K Rosenbek Minet, L Wagner, E M Lønvig, J Hjelmborg, J E Henriksen

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetologia, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00555854 (Can a Behavioural Modifying Intervention Increase the Self-care and the Effect of the Diabetes Treatment in Chronically Ill Patients With Diabetes), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00555854 nacompletednot on this map

Can a Behavioural Modifying Intervention Increase the Self-care and the Effect of the Diabetes Treatment in Chronically Ill Patients With Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorOdense University HospitalRan2005 to 2010Enrolled349ConditionsDiabetesArmsAn individual motivational intervention program to promote and maintain self-care behaviour
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

L K Rosenbek MinetDepartment of Endocrinology M, Odense University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. lisbeth.minet@ouh.regionsyddanmark.dk
L Wagner
E M Lønvig
J Hjelmborg
J E Henriksen
University of Southern Denmark · DKOdense University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisThe aim of this study was to measure the efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) compared with usual care on changes in glycaemic control and competence of diabetes self-management in patients with diabetes mellitus.

methodsPatients were eligible if they had type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus, were over 18 years of age and had participated in a 4 day group education programme offered at a diabetes clinic at a university hospital in Denmark. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy, severe debilitating disease and cognitive deficit. Out of 469 patients who attended the group education programme, 349 patients were randomised to either a usual care control group or an intervention group, which received up to five individual counselling sessions in 1 year based on MI, in addition to usual care. A randomised parallel design was used and open-label allocation was done by random permuted blocks, with allocation concealment by sequentially numbered, sealed, opaque envelopes. The primary outcome was glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)). Analysis regarding measurements of glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) and competence of self-management (using the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale [PAID] and Perceived Competence for Diabetes Scale [PCDS]) was based on 298 participants followed for a 24 month period. Data were collected at the Department of Endocrinology at Odense University Hospital. Our hypotheses were that MI could: (1) reduce HbA(1c) levels; (2) increase self-efficacy; and (3) increase diabetes self-care, compared with usual care.

resultsOut of the 176 included in the control group and 173 in the intervention group, 153 and 145 were analysed in the groups, respectively. When using the baseline value as covariate there were no significant differences in change score between the two study groups with regard to mean level of HbA(1c) (0.131, p = 0.221), PAID scores (-1.793, p = 0.191) or PCDS scores (0.017, p = 0.903) at the 24 month follow-up, using a mixed effects regression model. The patients in the intervention group showed significantly higher levels of perceived competence in dealing with diabetes compared with the control group (mean change score = -0.387, p = 0.002) following 1 year of intervention. CONCLUSION/

interpretationWe were unable to demonstrate any benefit, over or above usual care, of MI in patients with diabetes who have just completed a diabetes education programme, and who have well-regulated diabetes.

trial registrationClinical Trials NCT00555854.

Indexed as

MotivationAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicSelf CareGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID21455729
OpenAlexW2153287934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.