Systematic medical assessment, referral and treatment for diabetes care in China using lay family health promoters: protocol for the SMARTDiabetes cluster randomised controlled trial

David Peiris, Lei Sun, Anushka Patel, Maoyi Tian, Beverley Essue, Stephen Jan, Puhong Zhang, David Peiris, Lei Sun, Anushka Patel, Maoyi Tian, Beverley Essue, Stephen Jan, Puhong Zhang

Abstract

Background: Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) affects 113.9 million people in China, the largest number of any country in the world (JAMA 310:948-59, 2013). T2DM prevalence has risen dramatically from around 1 % in the 1980s to now over 10 % and is expected to continue rising. Despite the growing disease burden, few people with T2DM are achieving adequate management targets to prevent complications. Health system infrastructure in China is struggling to meet these gaps in care, and innovative, cost-effective and affordable solutions are needed. One promising strategy that may be particularly relevant to the Chinese context is improving support for lay family members to care for their relatives with T2DM.

Methods: We hypothesise that an interactive mobile health management system can support lay family health promoters (FHP) and healthcare staff to improve clinical outcomes for family members with T2DM through medical assessment, regular monitoring, lifestyle advice and the prescribing of guidelines recommended medications. This intervention will be implemented as a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 80 communities (40 communities in Beijing and 40 rural villages in Hebei province) and 2000 people with T2DM. Outcome analyses will be conducted blinded to intervention allocation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients achieving ≥2 "ABC" goals (HbA1c <7.0 %, blood pressure (BP) <140/80 mmHg and LDL cholesterol <100 mg/dl or 2.6 mmol/L) at the end of follow-up (Diabetes Care 36(Supplement 1):S11-S66, 2013). Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients achieving individual ABC targets; mean changes in HbA1c, BP, LDL, renal function (serum creatinine and urinary albumin), body mass index, quality of life (QOL, EQ-5D), and healthcare utilisation from baseline; and cost-effectiveness/utility of intervention. Trial outcomes will be accompanied by detailed process and economic evaluations.

Discussion: The Chinese government has prioritised prevention and treatment of diabetes as 1 of 11 National Basic Public Health Services. Despite great promise for mHealth interventions to improve access to effective health care, there remains uncertainty about how this can be successfully achieved. The findings are likely to inform policy on a scalable strategy to overcome sub-optimal access to effective health care in China.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02726100.

Keywords: Capacity strengthening; China; Implementation; Type 2 diabetes; mHealth.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Key elements of the intervention package
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Study schema

References

    1. Yang W, Lu J, Weng J, Jia W, Ji L, Xiao J, Shan Z, Liu J, Tian H, Ji Q, Zhu D, Ge J, Lin L, Chen L, Guo X, Zhao Z, Li Q, Zhou Z, Shan G, He J, China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Study Group Prevalence of diabetes among men and women in China. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(12):1090–101. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0908292.
    1. Xu Y, Wang L, He J, Bi Y, Li M, Wang T, Wang L, Jiang Y, Dai M, Lu J, Xu M, Li Y, Hu N, Li J, Mi S, Chen CS, Li G, Mu Y, Zhao J, Kong L, Chen J, Lai S, Wang W, Zhao W, Ning G, 2010 China Noncommunicable Disease Surveillance Group Prevalence and control of diabetes in Chinese adults. JAMA. 2013;310(9):948–59. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.168118.
    1. Zheng LL, Li CY, Chang FS, Lu YL, He XJ, Ma JQ, et al. Slow progress in the prevention and control of chronic diseases—utility 9 of performance assessment for provincial centers for disease control and prevention. Chin Health Resour. 2012;02:92–4.
    1. Chinese Ministry of Health. Family Health Care Survey 2008 [Available from: . Accessed 10 Aug 2016.
    1. Ji L, Hu D, Pan C, Weng J, Huo Y, Ma C, et al. Primacy of the 3B approach to control risk factors for cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes patients. Am J Med. 2013;126(10):925.e11–e22. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2013.02.035.
    1. Tao LL, Chen KH, Han XY. Status and strategies of chronic disease management in a district community health service stations in Beijing Resources. Chin Gen Pract. 2011;34:3959–61.
    1. Tshiananga JKT, Kocher S, Weber C, Erny-Albrecht K, Berndt K, Neeser K. The effect of nurse-led diabetes self-management education on glycosylated hemoglobin and cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Educ. 2012;38(1):108–23. doi: 10.1177/0145721711423978.
    1. Steinsbekk A, Rygg L, Lisulo M, Rise M, Fretheim A. Group based diabetes self-management education compared to routine treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic review with meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):213. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-213.
    1. Klein HA, Jackson SM, Street K, Whitacre JC, Klein G. Diabetes self-management education: miles to go. Nurs Res Pract. 2013;2013:15.
    1. El-Gayar O, Timsina P, Nawar N, Eid W. A systematic review of IT for diabetes self-management: are we there yet? Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(8):637–52. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.05.006.
    1. Zhang P, Yang Y, Z.H. X. Effect of family health promoter in community and primary health services. Chinese General Practice. 2010(01):75–7.
    1. Liang WN, Zhang PH. Guideline of non-communicable disease prevention and control in family. 1. Beijing: China Science and Technology Press; 2007.
    1. Zhang PH, et al. Analysis of effectiveness of Family Health Promoter Project and its determinants in Beijing. Chin Gen Pract. 2010;1:71–4.
    1. Feng B. Study on effectiveness of diabetes management based on family health promoter in community health service. J Community Med. 2013;1(4):76–7.
    1. Beijing Center For Community Management. 2011–2015 Annual Family Health Promotion Working Plan in Beijing No 6. JingWeiGuanZi, 2011.
    1. Statista. Smartphone market in China: Statistics and Facts 2012 [Available from: . Accessed 10 Aug 2016.
    1. Tian M, Ajay V, Dunzhu D, Hameed S, Li X, Liu Z, et al. A cluster-randomized controlled trial of a simplified multifaceted management program for individuals at high cardiovascular risk (SimCard Trial) in Rural Tibet, China, and Haryana, India. Circulation. 2015;132(9):815–24. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015373.
    1. Praveen D, Patel A, McMahon S, Prabhakaran D, Clifford G, Maulik P, et al. A multifaceted strategy using mobile technology to assist rural primary healthcare doctors and frontline health workers in cardiovascular disease risk management: protocol for the SMARTHealth India cluster randomised controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):137. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-137.
    1. Peiris D, Usherwood T, Panaretto K, Harris M, Hunt J, Redfern J, et al. Effect of a computer-guided, quality improvement program for cardiovascular disease risk management in primary health care: the treatment of cardiovascular risk using electronic decision support cluster-randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8(1):87–95. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001235.
    1. Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, Finch T, Kennedy A, Mair F, O’Donnell C, Nio Ong B, Rapley T, Rogers A, May C. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med. 2010;8:63. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-63.
    1. Michie S, van Stralen M, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6(1):42. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-42.
    1. Peiris PD, Joshi R, Webster JR, Groenestein P, Usherwood PT, Heeley E, et al. An electronic clinical decision support tool to assist primary care providers in cardiovascular disease risk management: development and mixed methods evaluation. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11(4):e51. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1258.
    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2013. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(Supplement 1):S11–66.
    1. Brooke J. SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland AL, editors. Usability evaluation in industry. London: Taylor and Francis; 1996.
    1. National Health and Family Planning Commission of the PRC. National Basic Public Health Services 2015 [Available from: . Accessed 10 Aug 2016.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever