- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT02672176
Improving Health in Diabetes Project (P2E2T2)
Patient and Provider Engagement and Empowerment Through Technology (P2E2T2) Program to Improve Health in Diabetes
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a growing public health problem highly amenable to prevention and health promotion interventions. Over 26 million people are diagnosed with diabetes, and an estimated 79 million people have pre-diabetes (1). Physical inactivity, poor eating habits, obesity and smoking are common risk factors for multiple chronic diseases, including DM, and are associated with premature deaths in the United States (2). Traditional interventions for diabetes emphasize education and typically do not address patient-generated health data (3). Motivational interviewing (MI) is a counseling tool to improve self-efficacy and support behavioral changes that has been used successfully in treatment of addictions and chronic conditions including diabetes (4-6). MI focuses on enhancing goal-setting skills by encouraging focus on manageable steps to improve overall health, establishing reasonable goals, and managing barriers and obstacles to goal attainment. Mobile health (mHealth) technology can be used to allow bi-directional, timely communication of data and tailored feedback between the patient and health care team; thus mHealth has the potential to change an individual' health behavior and prevent factors that lead to disease (7). This proposal tests the effectiveness of nurse coaches and the mHealth platform as resources to patients. Specifically, the investigators will test a mobile technology-enabled nurse coaching intervention as a means to engage and empower patients to set their own personal goals to address lifestyle and behavioral changes to better manage their diabetes and comorbidities. The addition of a wireless sensing wearable device to monitor participant activities (physical activity, energy expenditure and sleep quality) will allow the investigators to perform meaningful analysis of patient-generated health data and provide tailored feedback to motivate the patient to reach personal goals. The investigators will achieve this project through the following Specific Aims:
Specific Aim 1: To evaluate the effectiveness of the P2E2T2 program on diabetes management as measured by the following outcomes: 1) quality of life (QOL); 2) self-efficacy; 3) readiness to change; and 4) clinically relevant outcomes.
This study is a randomized, controlled trial with two groups: 1) Usual care (Care Coordination); and 2) the Patient and Provider Engagement and Empowerment Through Technology (P2E2T2) program - nurse coaching paired with mobile sensor technology to provide targeted feedback of patient-generated, real-world community physical activity and sleep quality data to the nurse coach, participants, and primary care providers to improve self-management of diabetes. Participants will be recruited from the UC Davis Primary Care Clinics network. After enrollment in the study, those randomized to receive the intervention will interact with their nurse coach through mobile technologies by telephone, or by text/e-mail through the secure mHealth dashboard platform established for communication and transfer of data. The investigators expect to enroll at least 150 patients in each of the intervention and control arms. This sample size will be sufficient to detect differences between the two groups. Even under the conservative assumption that design effects and dropout rates may result in a reduced sample size of 100 per treatment group, the study will still have at least 80% power to detect the specified clinically important effect size. Based on a previous study of nurse coaching using MI to improve disease self-management (8), the investigators found improvement in self-efficacy scores significantly higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. Data will be collected from participants at three time points: 1) baseline data at time of recruitment; 2) 3 months (coinciding with the completion of the intervention); and 3) 9 months (selected to assess sustained effects of the intervention (6 months after intervention ended)). At baseline, in addition to outcomes, all participants will complete a demographic survey which will include age, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, income level and insurance type and health history using the Charlson Comorbidity Index which includes common chronic conditions. All data for the study will be collected by the research coordinator and entered into the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) system housed in the servers managed by UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC) (9).
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
California
-
Sacramento, California, United States, 95817
- School of Nursing, University of California, Davis and UC Davis Health System
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- At least 18 years of age
- Diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus (type 2)
- Receiving care at one of the UC Davis Primary Care participating clinics (hospital-based Primary Care Clinic, the Folsom Primary Care Clinic)
- Able to read, write, and speak English
- Has access to a telephone and computing device
- Has had experience with use of a mobile smartphone & applications
- HgbA1C over 6.5%
Exclusion Criteria:
- Does not have Diabetes Mellitus
- Primary language is not English
- Pregnant women
- Those that not have access to a telephone or computing device
- Has a HgbA1C value under 6.5%
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Sham Comparator: Usual Care-Chronic Disease Management
Usual Care through Chronic Disease Management: The role of the care coordinator is to assess needs of the patient and coordinate healthcare referrals and appointments for the patient, facilitate communication among members of the healthcare team, identify health goals in collaboration with the patient and assist them in meeting those goals if requested by the patient.
Contact is variable and conducted on a case by case basis.
|
This program is a well-established program within the UC Davis Health System, providing care coordination to individuals with chronic conditions.
Patients can self-refer or are referred by their providers for this service.
The role of the care coordinator is to assess needs of the patient and coordinate healthcare referrals and appointments for the patient, facilitate communication among members of the healthcare team, identify health goals in collaboration with the patient and assist them in meeting those goals if requested by the patient.
Contact is variable and conducted on a case by case basis.
|
|
Active Comparator: P2E2T2 Program
The P2E2T2 intervention group will receive Nurse Health Coaching using MI, an approach designed to elicit and support behavioral changes and improve self-efficacy (2, 3).
Nurses delivering the intervention will have completed the Health Science Institutes Registered Health Coach (RHC) training program (www.healthsciences.org).
|
The P2E2T2 intervention group will receive Nurse Health Coaching using MI, an approach designed to elicit and support behavioral changes and improve self-efficacy (18-21).
Nurses delivering the intervention will have completed the Health Science Institutes Registered Health Coach (RHC) training program (www.healthsciences.org).
The intervention protocol is as follows:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Diabetes Self-efficacy Measured Using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale Short Form (DES-SF)- Scores at Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Diabetes self-efficacy (Diabetes Empowerment Scale (DES)-Short Form) (http://diabetesresearch.med.umich.edu/Tools_SurveyInstruments.php).
This eight-item survey instrument is derived from the 37 item DES survey, measuring diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy.
The scale uses a 5-point Likert scale with raw scores on the scale ranging from 8 to 40.
Total score is calculated as the sum of the eight questions divided by the number of items in the survey (range is 1 to 8), with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy.
The tool is a valid and reliable measure of overall diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy with an alpha of 0.84.
Concurrent validity was established with attitudes about having diabetes, understanding diabetes and improved A1C scores.
A 0.25 point difference in this score is equivalent to a shift of at least one point in two questions in the DES tool; in other words, they have improved their confidence in engaging in self-management behavior in two areas
|
Baseline
|
|
Diabetes Self-Efficacy Measured Using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale Short Form (DES-SF)
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Diabetes self-efficacy (Diabetes Empowerment Scale (DES)-Short Form) (http://diabetesresearch.med.umich.edu/Tools_SurveyInstruments.php).
This eight-item survey instrument is derived from the 37 item DES survey, measuring diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy.
The scale uses a 5-point Likert scale with raw scores on the scale ranging from 8 to 40.
Total score is calculated as the sum of the eight questions divided by the number of items in the survey (range is 1 to 8), with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy.
The tool is a valid and reliable measure of overall diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy with an alpha of 0.84.
Concurrent validity was established with attitudes about having diabetes, understanding diabetes and improved A1C scores.
A 0.25 point difference in this score is equivalent to a shift of at least one point in two questions in the DES tool; in other words, they have improved their confidence in engaging in self-management behavior in two areas
|
3 months
|
|
Diabetes Self-Efficacy Measured Using the Diabetes Empowerment Scale Short Form (DES-SF)- Scores at 9-months
Time Frame: 9-months
|
Diabetes self-efficacy (Diabetes Empowerment Scale (DES)-Short Form) (http://diabetesresearch.med.umich.edu/Tools_SurveyInstruments.php).
This eight-item survey instrument is derived from the 37 item DES survey, measuring diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy.
The scale uses a 5-point Likert scale with raw scores on the scale ranging from 8 to 40.
Total score is calculated as the sum of the eight questions divided by the number of items in the survey (range is 1 to 8), with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy.
The tool is a valid and reliable measure of overall diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy with an alpha of 0.84.
Concurrent validity was established with attitudes about having diabetes, understanding diabetes and improved A1C scores.
A 0.25 point difference in this score is equivalent to a shift of at least one point in two questions in the DES tool; in other words, they have improved their confidence in engaging in self-management behavior in two areas.
|
9-months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Depression Severity Measured by PHQ-9
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Depressive symptoms were measured with the PHQ-9.
This is a 9-question instrument commonly administered to patients in a primary care setting to screen for the presence and severity of depression.
The sum total of the responses ranges from 0 to 27.
The total score determines the level of depressive symptoms.
Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms.
In general, a score of 10 or above is suggestive of the presence of depression.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.89 when evaluated in 3000 primary care patients.
|
Baseline
|
|
Depression Severity Measured by PHQ-9
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Depressive symptoms were measured with the PHQ-9.
This is a 9-question instrument commonly administered to patients in a primary care setting to screen for the presence and severity of depression.
The sum total of the responses ranges from 0 to 27.
The total score determines the level of depressive symptoms.
Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms.
In general, a score of 10 or above is suggestive of the presence of depression.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.89 when evaluated in 3000 primary care patients.
|
3 months
|
|
Depression Severity Measured by PHQ-9
Time Frame: 9-months
|
Depressive symptoms were measured with the PHQ-9.
This is a 9-question instrument commonly administered to patients in a primary care setting to screen for the presence and severity of depression.
The sum total of the responses ranges from 0 to 27.
The total score determines the level of depressive symptoms.
Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms.
In general, a score of 10 or above is suggestive of the presence of depression.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.89 when evaluated in 3000 primary care patients.
|
9-months
|
|
Perceived Stress Measured by PSS
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Perceived Stress Score (PSS): This is a 4-item instrument administered to patients to measure the degree to which situations in one's life are determined as stressful.
The sum total of the responses can range from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating greater stress.
This instrument has acceptable reliability with an alpha of 0.60.
This scale has been used and validated in a number of chronic diseases including diabetes.
|
Baseline
|
|
Perceived Stress Measured by PSS
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Perceived Stress Score (PSS): This is a 4-item instrument administered to patients to measure the degree to which situations in one's life are determined as stressful.
The sum total of the responses can range from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating greater stress.
This instrument has acceptable reliability with an alpha of 0.60.
This scale has been used and validated in a number of chronic diseases including diabetes.
|
3 months
|
|
Perceived Stress Measured by PSS
Time Frame: 9 months
|
Perceived Stress Score (PSS): This is a 4-item instrument administered to patients to measure the degree to which situations in one's life are determined as stressful.
The sum total of the responses can range from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating greater stress.
This instrument has acceptable reliability with an alpha of 0.60.
This scale has been used and validated in a number of chronic diseases including diabetes.
|
9 months
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Emotional Distress Anxiety instrument measures self-reported fear, anxious misery and hyperarousal symptoms.
Anxiety is best differentiated by symptoms that reflect autonomic arousal and experience of threat.
The four-item instrument assesses anxiety over the past seven days using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw score is translated to a T-score using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 40.3 to 81.6.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores indicate greater emotional distress anxiety.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.92 when evaluated in 961 in patients with chronic hepatitis C.
|
Baseline
|
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety
Time Frame: 3 months
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Emotional Distress Anxiety instrument measures self-reported fear, anxious misery and hyperarousal symptoms.
Anxiety is best differentiated by symptoms that reflect autonomic arousal and experience of threat.
The four-item instrument assesses anxiety over the past seven days using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw scores are translated to T-scores using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 40.3 to 81.6.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores indicate greater emotional distress anxiety.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.92 when evaluated in 961 in patients with chronic hepatitis C.
|
3 months
|
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety
Time Frame: 9 months
|
PROMIS Emotional Distress Anxiety (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Emotional Distress Anxiety instrument measures self-reported fear, anxious misery and hyperarousal symptoms.
Anxiety is best differentiated by symptoms that reflect autonomic arousal and experience of threat.
The four-item instrument assesses anxiety over the past seven days using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw scores are translated to T-scores using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 40.3 to 81.6.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores indicate greater emotional distress anxiety.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.92 when evaluated in 961 in patients with chronic hepatitis C.
|
9 months
|
|
PROMIS Physical Function
Time Frame: Baseline
|
PROMIS Physical Function (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Physical Function instrument assess the current physical function in the individual.
It is a four-item scale measuring self-reported capability of physical activities, using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw scores are translated to T-scores using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 22.5 to 57.0.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores are associated with higher capability.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.91 when evaluated in 4880 patients in a diverse cohort of cancer patients in the US.
|
Baseline
|
|
PROMIS Physical Function
Time Frame: 3 months
|
PROMIS Physical Function (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Physical Function instrument assess the current physical function in the individual.
It is a four-item scale measuring self-reported capability of physical activities, using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw scores are translated to T-scores using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 22.5 to 57.0.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores are associated with higher capability.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.91 when evaluated in 4880 patients in a diverse cohort of cancer patients in the US.
|
3 months
|
|
PROMIS Physical Function
Time Frame: 9 months
|
PROMIS Physical Function (www.healthmeasures.net)
The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures (PROMIS) Physical Function instrument assess the current physical function in the individual.
It is a four-item scale measuring self-reported capability of physical activities, using a five item Likert scale (1= not at all, 5 = very much), yielding possible raw scores of 4 to 20.
The raw scores are translated to T-scores using a score conversion table, with a possible range of 22.5 to 57.0.
A score of 50 equals the mean.
Higher scores are associated with higher capability.
This instrument has demonstrated validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.91 when evaluated in 4880 patients in a diverse cohort of cancer patients in the US.
|
9 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Heather Young, UC Davis
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Young HM, Miyamoto S, Dharmar M, Tang-Feldman Y. Nurse Coaching and Mobile Health Compared With Usual Care to Improve Diabetes Self-Efficacy for Persons With Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Mar 2;8(3):e16665. doi: 10.2196/16665.
- Miyamoto S, Dharmar M, Fazio S, Tang-Feldman Y, Young HM. mHealth Technology and Nurse Health Coaching to Improve Health in Diabetes: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Feb 15;7(2):e45. doi: 10.2196/resprot.9168.
- Broadbent E, Garrett J, Jepsen N, Li Ogilvie V, Ahn HS, Robinson H, Peri K, Kerse N, Rouse P, Pillai A, MacDonald B. Using Robots at Home to Support Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Feb 13;20(2):e45. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8640.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 820612
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
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 Diabetes Mellitus
-
University of Colorado, DenverMassachusetts General Hospital; Beta Bionics, Inc.CompletedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1 | Type 1 Diabetes | Diabetes type1 | Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus | Autoimmune Diabetes | Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin-Dependent | Juvenile-Onset Diabetes | Diabetes, Autoimmune | Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus 1 | Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin-Dependent, 1 | Diabetes Mellitus, Brittle | Diabetes Mellitus, Juvenile-Onset and other conditionsUnited States
-
Guang NingRecruitingType 2 Diabetes Mellitus | Type1 Diabetes Mellitus | Monogenetic Diabetes | Pancreatogenic Diabetes | Drug-Induced Diabetes Mellitus | Other Forms of Diabetes MellitusChina
-
State University of New York at BuffaloMedical University of South CarolinaCompletedDiabetes Mellitus | Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus | Adult-Onset Diabetes Mellitus | Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus | Noninsulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus, Type IIUnited States
-
Hanmi Pharmaceutical Company LimitedUnknownType2 Diabetes Mellitus | Type1 Diabetes MellitusUnited States
-
Meir Medical CenterCompletedDiabetes Mellitus Type 2 | Diabetes Mellitus, Non-insulin Dependant | Diabetes Mellitus, on Oral Hypoglycemic Treatment | Adult Type Diabetes MellitusIsrael
-
Peking Union Medical College HospitalUnknownType 2 Diabetes Mellitus | Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus | Gestational Diabetes Mellitus | Pancreatogenic Diabetes Mellitus | Pregestational Diabetes Mellitus | Diabetes Patients in Perioperative PeriodChina
-
Medtronic MiniMed, Inc.RecruitingType 2 Diabetes Mellitus | Type 1 Diabetes MellitusUnited States, Australia, New Zealand
-
University of Colorado, DenverMassachusetts General Hospital; Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of... and other collaboratorsRecruitingDiabetes Mellitus | Diabetes | Type 2 Diabetes | Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 | Diabetes Mellitus, Type I | Diabetes Mellitus Type II | Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin-Dependent | Diabetes, Autoimmune | Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) | Diabetes Type 2 on Insulin | Diabetes, Type IIUnited States
-
SanofiCompletedType 1 Diabetes Mellitus-Type 2 Diabetes MellitusHungary, Russian Federation, Germany, Poland, Japan, United States, Finland
-
Medical University of South CarolinaNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)CompletedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2 | Diabetes Mellitus, Type II | Diabetes Mellitus, Adult-Onset | Diabetes Mellitus, Non-Insulin-Dependent | Diabetes Mellitus, Noninsulin DependentUnited States
Clinical Trials on Usual Care
-
Charite University, Berlin, GermanyCompletedMultiple Sclerosis | FatigueGermany
-
Charite University, Berlin, GermanyMammazentrum Hamburg am Krankenhaus Jerusalem, Germany; Dorit und Alexander...Completed
-
European Institute for Evidence Based Osteopathic...Unknown
-
Suzanna ZickUniversity of MichiganTerminatedQuality of Life | Fatigue | Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic | Sleep | Pain, ChronicUnited States
-
Centers for Disease Control and PreventionCompleted
-
University Hospital, MontpellierCompletedOsteoarthritis | Mindfulness | MBSRFrance
-
Gachon University Gil Oriental Medical HospitalKorea Health Industry Development InstituteCompletedKnee Replacement | AcupunctureKorea, Republic of
-
Mayo ClinicCompleted
-
Parc de Salut MarCompleted
-
The Miriam HospitalNational Institute on Aging (NIA)CompletedHeart FailureUnited States