Author:
Zainudin Aida Maziha,Rasool Aida Hanum Ghulam,Yaacob Najib Majdi,Muhamad Rosediani,Mohamed Wan Mohd Izani Wan
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Many patients with T2DM on insulin are not optimally controlled despite receiving standard diabetes education counselling. Poor insulin adherence may be a contributing factor. We developed and evaluated a new module [Universiti Sains Malaysia-Insulin Adherence Module (USM-IAM)] on insulin-treated patients with poorly controlled diabetes.
Methods
Eligibility criteria are those diagnosed with T2DM, aged between 18 and 65 years, with HbA1c between 8 and 15% and on insulin therapy for 1 year. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either the USM-IAM-based counselling or the standard counselling (SC) at baseline and the second visit. Patients were instructed to adjust insulin doses based on blood glucose levels. Outcomes were changes in adherence score, FBS and HbA1c levels from baseline to 3 months and baseline to sixth month.
Results
Ninety patients were randomised to each group. The baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were homogenous among groups. Ninety patients were analysed for each group. Adherence score changes between baseline to 3 months were − 8.30 (− 11.47, − 5.14) in USM-IAM-based counselling group (USM-IAM) and − 7.64 (− 10.89, − 4.40) in standard counselling group (SCG), between baseline to sixth month were − 10.21 (− 13.40, − 7.03) in USM-IAM and − 10.79 (− 14.64, − 6.97) in SCG. FBS changes between baseline to 3 months were 1.374 (0.25, 2.50) in USM-IAM and 0.438 (− 0.66, 1.54) in SCG, and between baseline to sixth month were 1.713 (0.473, 2.95) in USM-IAM and 0.998 (− 0.02, 2.01) in SCG. HbA1c changes between baseline to 3 months were 1.374 (0.25, 2.50) in USM-IAM and 0.547 (0.12, 0.98) in SCG, and between baseline to sixth month were 1.03 (0.65, 1.41) in USM-IAM and 0.617 (0.20, 1.03) in SCG. Between-subjects effects for all outcomes were not statistically significant.
Conclusion
Both groups had significant improvements in adherence score and HbA1c with time, with higher improvement in patients receiving the USM-IAM. FBS reductions were significant in the intervention group but not in the control group.
Trial registration
This study protocol is registered with Clicaltrials.gov with ID NCT05125185 dated 17th November 2021.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference42 articles.
1. IDF [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2022 Oct 2]. IDF Diabetes Atlas | Tenth Edition. Available from: https://diabetesatlas.org/.
2. Institute for Public Health. National Health and Morbidity Survey 1996. 1996. Available from: https://iku.nih.gov.my/nhms.
3. Institute for Public Health. National Health Morbidity Survey 2019 Non-Communicable Diseases: Risk Factors and other health problems [Internet] 2020. Available from: https://iku.moh.gov.my/images/IKU/Document/REPORT/NHMS2019/Report_NHMS2019-NCD_v2.pdf.
4. CPG - Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (6th Edition) - MEMS [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2022 Oct 3]. Available from: https://mems.my/cpg-management-of-type-2-diabetes-mellitus-6th-edition/.
5. ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda VR, Bannuru RR, Brown FM, Bruemmer D, et al. 9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care [Internet]. 2023 Jan 1;46(Supplement_1):S140–57. Available from: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S009.