Trial to Incentivise Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Marcel Bilger, Mitesh Shah, Ngiap Chuan Tan, Kaye Louise Howard, Hui Yan Xu, Ecosse Luc Lamoureux, Eric Andrew Finkelstein, Marcel Bilger, Mitesh Shah, Ngiap Chuan Tan, Kaye Louise Howard, Hui Yan Xu, Ecosse Luc Lamoureux, Eric Andrew Finkelstein

Abstract

Background: Many people with diabetes have suboptimal glycaemic control due to not being adherent to their treatment regimen. Behavioural economic theory suggests that the lack of adherence results from the disconnect between the timing of when costs and benefits accrue. One strategy to address this discontinuity is to offer patients a near-term benefit, such as a financial reward. Whereas there is evidence that rewards can improve treatment adherence and sometimes health outcomes, further research is needed to determine whether rewards are more effective when targeting processes or intermediary health outcomes. In the Trial to Incentivise Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD) we test whether adding financial incentives to usual care can improve HbA1c levels among people with diabetes and whether the financial incentives work better when targeting processes (adherence to blood glucose testing, medication, and daily physical activity) or the primary intermediary health outcome of self-monitored blood glucose within an acceptable range.

Methods/design: TRIAD is a randomised, controlled, open-label, single-centre superiority trial with three parallel arms. A total of 240 patients with suboptimally controlled diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 8%) from a polyclinic in Singapore are block-randomised (blocking factor: current vs. new glucometer users) into three arms, namely (1) usual care (UC) only, (2) UC with process incentive and (3) UC with outcome incentive, in a 2:3:3 ratio. Masking the arm allocation will be precluded by the behavioural nature of the intervention but blocking size will not be disclosed to protect concealment. The primary outcome (change in HbA1c level at month 6) will be measured by a laboratory that is independent from the study team. Secondary outcomes (at month 6) include the number of blood glucose testing days, glucose readings within the normal range (between 4 to 7 mmol/L), medication-adherent days, physically active days, and average incentives earned and time spent administrating the incentives.

Discussion: This study will provide evidence on whether financial incentives can cost-effectively improve glycaemic control. It will also provide evidence on the benefit incidence of interventions involving financial incentives. By comparing process to outcome incentives, this study will inform the design of future incentive strategies in chronic disease management and beyond.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registry, ID: NCT02224417 . Registered on 22 August 2014.

Keywords: Behaviour change; Blood glucose monitoring; Diabetes; Financial incentive; Medication adherence; Physical activity.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by the SingHealth Centralised Institutional Review Board E (Ref 2013/830/E) which oversees family medicine research at SingHealth. Written informed consent will be obtained from each participant prior to any study-related procedures.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) Figure. HbA1c glycated haemoglobin, EQ-5D-5L European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels, BIPQ Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, SMBG self-monitoring of blood glucose, BMQ Beliefs about Medication Questionnaire, DSCA Diabetes Self-Care Activities
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Trial to Incentivise Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD) participant timeline

References

    1. Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS medicine. 2006;3(11):e442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030442.
    1. World Health Organization. Global report on diabetes. 2016.
    1. Seuring T, Archangelidi O, Suhrcke M. The economic costs of type 2 diabetes: a global systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(8):811–31. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0268-9.
    1. Collaboration NRF Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4 · 4 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1513–30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00618-8.
    1. Ministry of Health of Singapore. Singapore Burden of Disease Study 2010. 2014.
    1. Ministry of Health of Singapore. National Health Survey 2010. 2011.
    1. Chrvala CA, Sherr D, Lipman RD. Diabetes self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of the effect on glycemic control. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99(6):926–43. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.11.003.
    1. McIntosh B, Yu C, Lal A, et al. Efficacy of self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus managed without insulin: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Med. 2010;4(2):e102–13.
    1. Avery L, Flynn D, Van Wersch A, Sniehotta FF, Trenell MI. Changing physical activity behavior in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(12):2681–9. doi: 10.2337/dc11-2452.
    1. Pal K, Eastwood SV, Michie S, et al. Computer-based interventions to improve self-management in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(6):1759–66. doi: 10.2337/dc13-1386.
    1. Tricco AC, Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, et al. Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies on the management of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379(9833):2252–61. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60480-2.
    1. Wong ND, Patao C, Wong K, Malik S, Franklin SS, Iloeje U. Trends in control of cardiovascular risk factors among US adults with type 2 diabetes from 1999 to 2010: comparison by prevalent cardiovascular disease status. Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2013;10(6):505–13. doi: 10.1177/1479164113496828.
    1. Laibson D. Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Q J Econ. 1997;112(2):443–77. doi: 10.1162/003355397555253.
    1. Garza KB, Owensby JK, Braxton Lloyd K, Wood EA, Hansen RA. Pilot study to test the effectiveness of different financial incentives to improve medication adherence. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50(1):32–8. doi: 10.1177/1060028015609354.
    1. Bilger M, Wong TT, Howard KL, et al. Study on Incentives for Glaucoma Medication Adherence (SIGMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to increase glaucoma medication adherence using value pricing. Trials. 2016;17(1):316. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1459-1.
    1. Kimmel SE, Troxel AB, French B, et al. A randomized trial of lottery‐based incentives and reminders to improve warfarin adherence: the Warfarin Incentives (WIN2) trial. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016;25(11):1219–27. doi: 10.1002/pds.4094.
    1. Kimmel SE, Troxel AB, Loewenstein G, et al. Randomized trial of lottery-based incentives to improve warfarin adherence. Am Heart J. 2012;164(2):268–74. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.05.005.
    1. Long JA, Jahnle EC, Richardson DM, Loewenstein G, Volpp KG. Peer mentoring and financial incentives to improve glucose control in African American veterans; a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(6):416–24. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-6-201203200-00004.
    1. Sen AP, Sewell TB, Riley EB, et al. Financial incentives for home-based health monitoring: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(5):770–7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2778-0.
    1. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HAW, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000;321(7258):405–12. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7258.405.
    1. Group TE. EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9.
    1. Janssen M, Lubetkin E, Sekhobo J, Pickard A. The use of the EQ‐5D preference‐based health status measure in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2011;28(4):395–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03136.x.
    1. Gao F, Ng G-Y, Cheung Y-B, et al. The Singaporean English and Chinese versions of the EQ-5D achieved measurement equivalence in cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(2):206–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.03.007.
    1. Broadbent E, Petrie KJ, Main J, Weinman J. The Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. J Psychosom Res. 2006;60(6):631–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.10.020.
    1. Broadbent E, Wilkes C, Koschwanez H, Weinman J, Norton S, Petrie KJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Psychol Health. 2015;30(11):1361–85. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2015.1070851.
    1. Lin Y-P, Chiu K-M, Wang T-J. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire for patients with coronary heart disease. 亞東學報. 2011;31:145–55.
    1. Polonsky W, Fisher L, Parkin C, Jelopvsky Z, Wagner R. Assessing patient beliefs about self-monitoring of blood glucose: development of a new selfreport scale. Diabetes. 2011;60(Suppl 1):807.
    1. Horne R, Weinman J. Patients’ beliefs about prescribed medicines and their role in adherence to treatment in chronic physical illness. J Psychosom Res. 1999;47(6):555–67. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3999(99)00057-4.
    1. Horne R, Weinman J, Hankins M. The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: the development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health. 1999;14(1):1–24. doi: 10.1080/08870449908407311.
    1. Zaixia S, Min Z, Guangqing C, Lingxia G, Tingting Z, Chen W. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-Specific among patients on warfarin therapy after mechanical heart-valve replacement. J Nurs Sci. 2013;4:011.
    1. Lyu Y, Li Z, Han M-y, Meng X-h, Cheng G, An F-r. The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Beliefs about Medical Questionnaire among elderly patients with depressive disorder. Chin J Nurs. 2014;4:002.
    1. French DP, Wade AN, Farmer AJ. Predicting self-care behaviours of patients with type 2 diabetes: the importance of beliefs about behaviour, not just beliefs about illness. J Psychosom Res. 2013;74(4):327–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.12.008.
    1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 1997. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. N Engl J Med. 1997(336). pp.309-316.
    1. Mazar N, Amir O, Ariely D. The dishonesty of honest people: a theory of self-concept maintenance. J Mark Res. 2008;45(6):633–44. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633.
    1. Finkelstein EA, Haaland BA, Bilger M, et al. Effectiveness of activity trackers with and without incentives to increase physical activity (TRIPPA): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(12):983–95. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30284-4.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever