Enhancing Informal Caregiving to Support Diabetes Self-Management

October 23, 2017 updated by: James Aikens, PhD, University of Michigan
This study compares the medical and psychological effects of telemonitoring plus intensified self-management support to those of usual care alone for patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). If this intervention proves effective without increasing costs or clinician burden, then its implementation could yield major public health benefits, especially for vulnerable and underserved DM patients, and broader societal benefit may occur through increased helping behavior and strengthened social ties.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Detailed Description

Although in-home caregivers (ICGs) help improve diabetes mellitus (DM) outcomes, they may lack the resources needed to do this optimally, and are at risk for psychosocial decline and caregiver burnout. Complicating matters, millions of chronically-ill older Americans live alone and receive long-distance caregiving without any supporting structure or resources to ensure its effectiveness. In this study, diabetes patients with poor glycemic will be recruited from two clinical sites, and half will have an ICG. Patients will nominate a "CarePartner" (CP; adult relatives or friends from outside their home) to receive weekly email reports about their DM health and behavioral needs, and will be given resources to help them to provide self-management support. Patients will then be randomized to receive either one year of CP intervention or usual medical care. In the CP intervention arm, patients will provide weekly updates on their DM health and self-management through weekly automated telemonitoring. Summaries of this will be emailed to their CP along with guidance on helping the patient address reported problem(s), and their clinicians will be alerted about medically-urgent problems. We will assess the following outcomes in both arms before intervention and also after 6 and 12 months of intervention: glycemic control, DM-related distress, DM self-management, health-related quality of life, systolic blood pressure, caregiver burden, relationship quality, and cost of DM care.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

864

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Michigan
      • Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States, 48105
        • University of Michigan
      • Flint, Michigan, United States, 48504
        • Hamilton Health Center
      • Jackson, Michigan, United States, 49201
        • Center for Family Health
      • Lincoln, Michigan, United States, 48742
        • Alcona Health Center
      • Muskegon Heights, Michigan, United States, 49444
        • Muskegon Family Care
      • Saint Clair Shores, Michigan, United States, 48082
        • St. John Masonic Medical Center

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

21 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion criteria:

  • type 2 DM (hospitalization or outpatient visit within 12 months for >2 ICD9 codes of 250.xx or therapeutic class codes C4G, C4K, or C4L in past 2 years' problem list)
  • poor glycemic control (recent HbA1c% >7.5)
  • at least 21 years old
  • fluent in English
  • can use telephone numeric touchtone keypad
  • can identify 1-4 eligible CPs
  • not in palliative care, on transplant waitlist, or at high risk for 1-year mortality
  • free of major psychiatric or cognitive impairment.
  • ICGs: We will stratify recruitment within sites so that 50% of enrolled patients have an ICG.
  • Patients with an ICG cannot enroll unless their ICG also provides consent.
  • has a CP that resides in continental US but outside patient's household; has communicated with patient, in person or by phone, at least once monthly over preceding 6 months; has a home telephone or mobile cell phone; has an internet connection; can communicate via e-mail; is free of severe psychiatric/cognitive impairment; is fluent in English; and is at least 21 years of age.

Exclusion criteria

  • Limited life expectancy (e.g., advanced stage cancer/heart failure/on oxygen/end stage renal disease), receiving palliative care
  • active alcohol or drug abuse
  • dementia, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia
  • unable to speak English
  • not planning to get all or most of care at study site
  • primary care physician not affiliated with study site
  • unable to use a telephone to respond to weekly automated self-management support calls
  • unable to nominate an eligible CP
  • ICG (if present) does not consent to participate.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Telemonitoring + self-management support
Automated assessment calls with follow-up by a Care Manager and a CarePartner for 12 months. Baseline, 6 month, and 12 month follow-up.
Weekly automated assessment calls with follow-up by a care manager and a CarePartner for 12 months. Baseline, 6 month, and 12 month follow-up
No Intervention: Usual Care

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
12-month glycemic control
Time Frame: 12 months
H1 (Primary biological outcome): Compared to DM patients randomized to control, those randomized to intervention will have a 0.3% greater improvement in HbA1c units.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Secondary effects upon adjustment to diabetes
Time Frame: 12 months
Compared to controls, intervention patients will have lower diabetes related distress.
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: James E Aikens, PhD, University of Michigan

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

December 1, 2012

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 26, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

September 26, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 22, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 10, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

September 13, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 25, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 23, 2017

Last Verified

October 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Undecided

IPD Plan Description

Pending IRB approval.

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Clinical Trials on Telemonitoring + self-management support

Subscribe