Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38962638›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Optimizing Blood Pressure Management in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Investigation of One-Time Versus Periodic Lifestyle Modification Counseling.

Shweta Malakar, Shivendra Kumar Singh, Kauser Usman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

3 authors.

Shweta MalakarCommunity Medicine, King George's Medical University (KGMU), Lucknow, IND.
Shivendra Kumar SinghCommunity Medicine, King George's Medical University (KGMU), Lucknow, IND.
Kauser UsmanInternal Medicine, King George's Medical University (KGMU), Lucknow, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often coexists with hypertension, significantly increasing cardiovascular risks. Lifestyle modification counseling has shown promise in managing T2DM and its comorbidities. However, the optimal frequency and structure of counseling for blood pressure control remain uncertain. Our study examines the best approach for managing blood pressure in T2DM patients by comparing the outcomes of two counseling strategies: a single session and periodic counseling over time. Methodology A total of 110 diabetic patients were enrolled, with 52 patients in each group after loss to follow-up. A randomized controlled trial compared one-time counseling (control) to six months of periodic counseling (intervention) on lifestyle modification. A weighing machine, stadiometer, 24-hour dietary recall, food frequency questionnaire, biochemical blood sugar level analysis, and telephonic follow-up were the essential tools used. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), employing descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, graphs, mean, and standard deviation. Statistical significance at the 5% level was tested using probability (p) calculations. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test confirmed normal distribution (p > 0.05). Parametric tests, specifically independent t-tests, were used for between-group comparisons of continuous variables, while categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Intragroup comparisons over time employed repeated-measures analysis of variance for continuous variables. Changes within groups after six months were assessed using paired t-tests. All statistical analyses adhered to a significance level of p < 0.05. Results The gender distribution at baseline was similar between the control (55.8% male, 44.2% female) and intervention (46.2% male, 53.8% female) groups, with no significant differences (p = 0.327). The mean weight was 66.67 ± 11.51 kg in the control group and 67.14 ± 11.19 kg in the intervention group (p = 0.835), and the body mass index was 25.61 ± 4.09 kg/m² and 26.29 ± 6.01 kg/m², respectively (p = 0.503). Clinical parameters such as fasting blood sugar, postprandial blood sugar, glycosylated hemoglobin, and blood pressure showed no significant differences between the control and intervention groups at baseline (p > 0.05). After six months, the intervention group exhibited a trend toward lower blood pressure compared to the control group, but the differences were not statistically significant. The mean systolic blood pressure was 132.15 ± 14.867 mmHg in the control group and 129.15 ± 9.123 mmHg in the intervention group (p = 0.218). Changes in blood pressure over the six-month period showed significant decreases within the intervention group, while changes in the control group did not reach statistical significance. The mean difference in systolic blood pressure in the intervention group was 5.54 ± 9.77 mmHg (p = 0.0001), indicating a notable reduction, while the control group had a smaller and statistically insignificant increase of 2.308 ± 9.388 mmHg (p = 0.082). Conclusions This study addresses a significant gap in the literature by comparing the efficacy of one-time vs. periodic counseling in T2DM management. While periodic counseling shows promise in improving diastolic blood pressure, further research is needed to understand its nuanced effects and optimize lifestyle interventions for T2DM patients.

Indexed as

blood pressure managementcardiovascular riskcomparative investigationcounselingglycemic managementhypertensionlifestyle modificationperiodic counselingrandomized controlled trialtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID38962638
PMCPMC11221843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.