Search

IntroductionTo report the observations of point-of-care (POC) glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing in people with non-diabetic hyperglycemia (NDH; HbA1c 42–47 mmol/mol (6.0%–6.4%)), applied in community settings, within the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP).Research design and methodsA service evaluation assessing prospectively collected national service-level data from the NHS DPP, using data from the first referral received in June 2016–October 2018. Individuals were referred to the NHS DPP with a laboratory-measured HbA1c in the NDH range and had a repeat HbA1c measured at first attendance of the program using one of three POC devices: DCA Vantage, Afinion or A1C Now+. Differences between the referral and POC HbA1c and the SD of the POC HbA1c were calculated. The factors associated with the difference in HbA1c and the association between POC HbA1c result and subsequent attendance of the NHS DPP were also evaluated.ResultsData from 73 703 participants demonstrated a significant mean difference between the referral and POC HbA1c of −2.48 mmol/mol (−0.23%) (t=157, pConclusionPOC HbA1c testing in community settings was associated with significantly lower HbA1c values when compared with laboratory-measured referrals. Acknowledging effects of regression to the mean, we found that these differences were also associated with POC method, location, individual patient factors and time between measurements. Compared with POC HbA1c values in the NDH range, normoglycemic POC HbA1c values were associated with lower subsequent intervention attendance.

The National Diabetes Stakeholders Covid‐19 Response Group was formed in early April 2020 as a rapid action by the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care, Diabetes UK, the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists, and Diabetes Frail to address and support the special needs of residents with diabetes in UK care homes during Covid‐19. It was becoming obvious that the care home sector was becoming a second wave of Covid‐19 infection and that those with diabetes residing in care homes were at increased risk not only of susceptibility to infection but also to poorer outcomes. Its key purposes included minimising the morbidity and mortality associated with Covid‐19 and assisting care staff to identify those residents with diabetes at highest risk of Covid‐19 infection. The guidance was particularly created for care home managers, other care home staff, and specialist and non‐specialist community nursing teams. The guidance covers the management of hyperglycaemia by discussion of various clinical scenarios that could arise, the management of hypoglycaemia, foot care and end of life care. In addition, it outlines the conditions where hospital admission is required. The guidance should be regarded as interim and will be updated as further medical and scientific evidence becomes available.

Aim: Diabetes impairs the quality of life of people living with the condition and is a major public health concern. The aim of this paper is to create a state of the nation report of diabetes in the UK. Methods: Diabetes UK collates information about diabetes from diverse sources. This paper synthesizes these data to create a national report. Results: Some 7% of the UK population are now living with diabetes; approximately one million people have undiagnosed type 2 diabetes, 40 000 children have diabetes and more than 3000 children are diagnosed every year. Forty-nine per cent of people with type 1 diabetes were offered structured education, but only 7.6% attended; the corresponding figures for type 2 diabetes were 90% and 10.4%, respectively. Among people with diabetes, 28% reported having issues obtaining medication or equipment for self-management. Fifty-seven per cent of people with type 1 diabetes and 42% with type 2 diabetes do not receive all eight annual health checks. Around 40% of people with diabetes have diminished psychological well-being. One-third of people have a microvascular complication at the time of diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes is responsible for 530 myocardial infarctions and 175 amputations every week. The National Health Service spends at least £10 billion a year on diabetes, equivalent to 10% of its budget; 80% is spent treating complications. One in six hospital inpatients has diabetes. Conclusion: Diabetes continues to place a significant burden on the individual with diabetes and wider UK society. This report will be updated annually to understand how diabetes is changing across the UK.

OBJECTIVE To assess weight and HbA1c changes in the Healthier You: National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP), the largest DPP globally to achieve universal population coverage. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A service evaluation assessed intervention effectiveness for adults with nondiabetic hyperglycemia (HbA1c 42–47 mmol/mol [6.0–6.4%] or fasting plasma glucose 5.5–6.9 mmol/L) between program launch in June 2016 and December 2018, using prospectively collected, national service–level data in England. RESULTS By December 2018, 324,699 people had been referred, 152,294 had attended the initial assessment, and 96,442 had attended at least 1 of 13 group-based intervention sessions. Allowing sufficient time to elapse, 53% attended an initial assessment, 36% attended at least one group-based session, and 19% completed the intervention (attended >60% of sessions). Of the 32,665 who attended at least one intervention session and had sufficient time to finish, 17,252 (53%) completed: intention-to-treat analyses demonstrated a mean weight loss of 2.3 kg (95% CI 2.2, 2.3) and an HbA1c reduction of 1.26 mmol/mol (1.20, 1.31) (0.12% [0.11, 0.12]); completer analysis demonstrated a mean weight loss of 3.3 kg (3.2, 3.4) and an HbA1c reduction of 2.04 mmol/mol (1.96, 2.12) (0.19% [0.18, 0.19]). Younger age, female sex, Asian and black ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and normal baseline BMI were associated with less weight loss. Older age, female sex, black ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and baseline overweight and obesity were associated with a smaller HbA1c reduction. CONCLUSIONS Reductions in weight and HbA1c compare favorably with those reported in recent meta-analyses of pragmatic studies and suggest likely future reductions in participant type 2 diabetes incidence.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) in children and young people is increasing worldwide with a particular increase in children under the age of 5 years. Fewer than one in six children and young people achieve glycosylated fraction of haemoglobin (HbA1c) values in the range identified as providing best future outcomes. There is an urgent need for clinic-based pragmatic, feasible and effective interventions that improve both glycaemic control and quality of life (QoL). The intervention offers both structured education, to ensure young people know what they need to know, and a delivery model designed to motivate self-management. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of providing a clinic-based structured educational group programme incorporating psychological approaches to improve long-term glycaemic control, QoL and psychosocial functioning in a diverse range of young people. DESIGN: The study was a pragmatic, cluster randomised control trial with integral process and economic evaluation. SETTING: Twenty-eight paediatric diabetes services across London, south-east England and the Midlands. RANDOMISATION: Minimised by clinic size, age (paediatric or adolescent) and specialisation (district general hospital clinic or teaching hospital/tertiary clinic). ALLOCATION: Half of the sites were randomised to the intervention arm and half to the control arm. Allocation was concealed until after clinics had consented and the first participant was recruited. Where possible, families were blind to allocation until recruitment finished. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-three health-care practitioners (14 teams) were trained in the intervention. The study recruited 362 children aged 8-16 years, diagnosed with T1D for > 12 months, with a mean 12-month HbA1c level of ≥ 8.5%. INTERVENTION: Two 1-day workshops taught intervention delivery. A detailed manual and resources were provided. The intervention consists of four group education sessions led by a paediatric diabetes specialist nurse with another team member. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was glycaemic control, assessed at the individual level using venous HbA1c values, measured at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Secondary outcomes were directly and indirectly related to diabetes management, including hypoglycaemic episodes, hospital admissions, diabetes regimen, knowledge, skills and responsibility for diabetes management, intervention compliance, clinic utilisation, emotional and behavioural adjustment, and general and diabetes-specific QoL. PROCESS EVALUATION: Questionnaires, semistructured interviews, informal discussion following observation sessions, fieldwork notes and case note review were used to collect qualitative and quantitative data from key stakeholder groups at specific time points in the trial. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Primary and secondary analyses were intention-to-treat comparisons of outcomes at 12 and 24 months, using analysis of covariance with a random effect for clinic. Prespecified subgroup analyses based on age, gender, initial HbA1c value and socioeconomic status were estimated from models that included an interaction term. The economic analysis compared long-term costs and predicted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: The intervention did not improve HbA1c at 12 months [intervention effect 0.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to 0.50; p = 0.584] or 24 months (intervention effect 0.03; 95% CI -0.36 to 0.41; p = 0.891). A total of 298/362 patients (82.3%) provided blood samples at 12-month follow-up, and 284/362 (78.5%) provided blood samples at 24-month follow-up. Follow-up questionnaires were completed by 307 patients (85.3%) at 12 months and by 295 patients (81.5%) at 24 months. Intervention group parents at 12 months (95% CI 0.74; 0.03 to 1.52) and young people at 24 months (0.85; 95% CI 0.03 to 1.61) had higher scores on the diabetes family responsibility questionnaire. Young people reported reduced happiness with body weight at 12 months (-0.56; 95% CI -1.03 to -0.06). Only 68% of groups were run. Of the 180 families recruited, 96 (53%) attended at least one module. Reasons for low uptake included difficulties organising groups, and work and school commitments. Young people with higher HbA1c levels were less likely to attend. Parents and young people who attended groups described improved family relationships, improved knowledge and understanding, greater confidence and increased motivation to manage diabetes. Twenty-four months after the intervention, nearly half of the young people reported that the groups had made them want to try harder and that they had carried on trying. A high-quality, complex, pragmatic trial of structured education can be delivered alongside standard care in NHS diabetes clinics. Health-care providers benefited from behaviour change skill training and can deliver pragmatic aspects of a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-compliant structured education programme after relatively brief training. The process evaluation provides insight into aspects of the model, and highlights strengths and aspects that may have contributed to the failure to influence primary and secondary outcomes. Current NHS practice dominates CASCADE (Child and Adolescent Structured Competencies Approach to Diabetes Education) in that it achieves the same number of QALYs at a lower cost. The mean cost of providing the intervention was £5098 per site or £683 per child. Members of paediatric diabetes services trained to deliver the CASCADE structured education package using behaviour change techniques did not improve glycaemic control in patients compared with control subjects 1 and 2 years after the intervention. The training workshops for practitioners were well evaluated; however, more intensive training was needed. The intervention cost £683 per patient but was not cost-effective because it did not improve metabolic control. CONCLUSIONS: A high-quality, complex, pragmatic trial of structured education can be successfully conducted alongside standard care in NHS diabetes clinics. Pragmatic components of a NICE-compliant structured education programme can be successfully delivered following a relatively brief 2-day training while paediatric health-care professionals benefit from training in behaviour change skills. The study provides invaluable information on barriers and opportunities regarding future, similar interventions. A low dropout rate and good attendance for the subgroup that attended the intervention suggests there might be improved uptake if offered to young people with lower HbA1c. Testing whether this approach can be more successful with a robust ongoing supervisory element should be a target of further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52537669. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: This trial aims to evaluate effective delivery and cost effectiveness of an innovative structured psycho-educational programme (CASCADE) for young people and their families living with diabetes. The increase in numbers of people being diagnosed with diabetes is posing a challenge for both the UK and the rest of the world. The peak age for diagnosis is between 10 and 14 years of age. There is clear evidence that improved diabetes control from diagnosis in childhood can reduce the incidence and progression of long-term complications. However, despite the development of improved insulin regimens and delivery methods, the overall metabolic control in children and adolescents has improved little in the UK in the past decade. Therefore there is a need for novel interventions and health delivery mechanisms aimed at young people and their families to help improve control and reduce complications, illness burden and costs to the NHS. Methods/Design: The CASCADE trial is a multi-centre randomised control trial with 26 clinics randomised to control or intervention groups, with 572 children and young people involved in the study. The intervention will be delivered in 4 group sessions, over a 4 month period. A developmentally appropriate curriculum will be delivered to groups of 3 - 4 families, focusing on achievement of increasing competency in self-management of diabetes. The control group will receive standard care from their clinical team, usually consisting of regular 3-monthly clinic visits and telephone contact as required with the clinical nurse specialist and consultant. The primary outcomes of the trial will be change in HbA1c between baseline and 12 months and 24 months post recruitment. Secondary outcomes will include measures related to the economic evaluation, psychosocial outcomes, outcomes related to management of diabetes outcomes, and adherence to the intervention. Discussion: The trial will be run by independent research and service delivery teams and supervised by a trial steering committee. A data monitoring and ethics committee has been put in place to monitor the trial and recommend stopping/continuation according to a Peto-Haybittle rule. The trial will be conducted according to the principles of MRC Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Guidelines and CTRU Phase III Trial Standard Operating procedures. © 2009 Christie et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd., link_to_subscribed_fulltext