Core outcome set for diabetes after pregnancy prevention across the life span: international Delphi study

Effectiveness of a blended mobile-based lifestyle intervention in women with glucose intolerance after a recent history of gestational diabetes (MELINDA): a 1-year, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background

Women with glucose intolerance after gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are at high risk to develop type 2 diabetes. Traditional lifestyle interventions in early postpartum have limited impact. We investigated the efficacy of a blended mobile-based lifestyle intervention in women with glucose intolerance after a recent history of GDM.

Methods

Prospective, double-arm, non-masked, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) in which women with glucose intolerance, diagnosed 6-16 weeks after a GDM-complicated pregnancy, were assigned 1:1 to a one-year blended-care, telephone- and mobile-based lifestyle program (intervention) or usual care (control). Primary endpoint was the proportion of women able to achieve their weight goal (≥5% weight loss if prepregnancy BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 or return to prepregnancy weight if prepregnancy BMI < 25 kg/m2) in the intention-to-treat sample. Key secondary outcomes were frequency of glucose intolerance, diabetes and metabolic syndrome, and lifestyle-related outcomes assessed with self-administered questionnaires. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03559621).

Findings

Between April 10th 2019 and May 13th 2022, 240 participants were assigned to the intervention (n = 121) or control group (n = 119), of which 167 (n = 82 in intervention and n = 85 in control group) completed the study. Primary outcome was achieved by 46.3% (56) of intervention participants compared to 43.3% (52) in the control group [odds ratio (OR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-2.03, p = 0.680; risk ratio 1.07, 95% CI (0.78-1.48)]. Women in the intervention group developed significantly less often metabolic syndrome compared to the control group [7.3% (6) vs. 16.5% (14), OR 0.40, CI (0.22-0.72), p = 0.002], reported less sedentary behaviour and higher motivation for continuing healthy behaviours. In the intervention group, 84.1% (69) attended at least eight telephone sessions and 70.7% (58) used the app at least once weekly.

Interpretation

A blended, mobile-based lifestyle intervention was not effective in achieving weight goals, but reduced the risk to develop metabolic syndrome.

Funding

Research fund of University Hospitals Leuven, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Lilly.

Current status and implementation strategies of patient education in core outcome set development

OBJECTIVE

Patient participation is essential for Core Outcome Set (COS) development studies. Patient education during participation may help patients better express their views in COS studies. This study aimed to investigate the current status of patient participation and the specified educational information in COS studies.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of COS development studies. Information on patient participation in COS research, and especially details of patient education, was analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 146 COS development studies were included in this review. Of these, 125 studies (85.6%) mentioned patient participation. Most studies did not provide explicit information on patient participation. Some studies mentioned recruiting patients, but ultimately, none of them responded. Six studies reported conducting patient education through workshops, creating patient forums, or providing videos and slides. However, these studies did not provide details on education. Twenty-three studies used the plain language to explain patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

COS developers are increasingly focusing on patient participation. However, only a few COS studies have explicitly reported conducting measures related to patient education. Further patient education is necessary when they participate in the development of a new Core Outcome Set.

PRACTICE IMPLICATION

This article provides implementation strategies related to patient education for future COS development studies.

Synthesizing Core Outcome Sets for outcomes research in cohort studies: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Life course studies are designed to "collect once, use multiple times" for observational and, increasingly, interventional research. Core Outcome Sets (COS) are minimum sets developed for clinical trials by multi-stakeholder consensus methodologies. We aimed to synthesize published COS that might guide outcomes selection for early life cohorts with an interventional focus.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Medline, COMET, and CROWN for COS published before January 2021 relevant to four life stages (pregnancy, newborns, children <8 years, and parents (adults aged 18-50 years)). We synthesized core outcomes into overarching constructs.

RESULTS

From 46 COS we synthesized 414 core outcomes into 118 constructs. "Quality of life", "adverse events", "medication use", "hospitalization", and "mortality" were consistent across all stages. For pregnancy, common constructs included "preterm birth", "delivery mode", "pre-eclampsia", "gestational weight gain", "gestational diabetes", and "hemorrhage"; for newborns, "birthweight", "small for gestational age", "neurological damage", and "morbidity" and "infection/sepsis"; for pediatrics, "pain", "gastrointestinal morbidity", "growth/weight", "breastfeeding", "feeding problems", "hearing", "neurodevelopmental morbidity", and "social development"; and for adults, "disease burden", "mental health", "neurological function/stroke", and "cardiovascular health/morbidity".

CONCLUSION

This COS synthesis generated outcome constructs that are of high value to stakeholders (participants, health providers, services), relevant to life course research, and could position cohorts for trial capabilities.

IMPACT

We synthesized existing Core Outcome Sets as a transparent methodology that could prioritize outcomes for lifecourse cohorts with an interventional focus. "Quality of life", "adverse events", "medication use", "hospitalization", and "mortality" are important outcomes across pregnancy, newborns, childhood, and early-to-mid-adulthood (the age range relevant to parents). Other common outcomes (such as "birthweight", "cognitive function/ability", "psychological health") are also highly relevant to lifecourse research. This synthesis could assist new early life cohorts to pre-select outcomes that are of high value to stakeholders (participants, health providers, services), are relevant to lifecourse research, and could position them for future trials and interventional capability.

Systematically developing a family-based health promotion intervention for women with prior gestational diabetes based on evidence, theory and co-production: the Face-it study

BACKGROUND

Women with prior gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes; however, this risk can be reduced by engaging in positive health behaviours e.g. healthy diet and regular physical activity. As such behaviours are difficult to obtain and maintain there is a need to develop sustainable behavioural interventions following GDM. We aimed to report the process of systematically developing a health promotion intervention to increase quality of life and reduce diabetes risk among women with prior GDM and their families. We distil general lessons about developing complex interventions through co-production and discuss our extensions to intervention development frameworks.

METHODS

The development process draws on the Medical Research Council UK Development of complex interventions in primary care framework and an adaptation of a three-stage framework proposed by Hawkins et al. From May 2017 to May 2019, we iteratively developed the Face-it intervention in four stages: 1) Evidence review, qualitative research and stakeholder consultations; 2) Co-production of the intervention content; 3) Prototyping, feasibility- and pilot-testing and 4) Core outcome development. In all stages, we involved stakeholders from three study sites.

RESULTS

During stage 1, we identified the target areas for health promotion in families where the mother had prior GDM, including applying a broad understanding of health and a multilevel and multi-determinant approach. We pinpointed municipal health visitors as deliverers and the potential of using digital technology. In stage 2, we tested intervention content and delivery methods. A health pedagogic dialogue tool and a digital health app were co-adapted as the main intervention components. In stage 3, the intervention content and delivery were further adapted in the local context of the three study sites. Suggestions for intervention manuals were refined to optimise flexibility, delivery, sequencing of activities and from this, specific training manuals were developed. Finally, at stage 4, all stakeholders were involved in developing realistic and relevant evaluation outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive description of the development of the Face-it intervention provides an example of how to co-produce and prototype a complex intervention balancing evidence and local conditions. The thorough, four-stage development is expected to create ownership and feasibility among intervention participants, deliverers and local stakeholders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03997773 , registered retrospectively on 25 June 2019.