A systematic method for selecting patient-reported outcome measures in diabetes research

Digital health interventions for gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Good blood glucose control is important to reduce the risk of adverse effects on mothers and their offspring in women with gestational diabetes (GDM). This review examined the impact of using digital health interventions on reported glycaemic control among pregnant women with GDM and its impact on maternal and foetal outcomes. Seven databases were searched from database inception to October 31st, 2021 for randomised controlled trials that examined digital health interventions to provide services remotely for women with GDM. Two authors independently screened and assessed the studies for eligibility for inclusion. Risk of bias was independently assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Studies were pooled using random effects model and presented as risk ratio or mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE framework. Twenty-eight randomised controlled trials that examined digital health interventions in 3,228 pregnant women with GDM were included. Moderate certainty of evidence showed that digital health interventions improved glycaemic control among pregnant women, with lower fasting plasma glucose (mean difference -0.33 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.07), 2-hour post-prandial glucose (-0.49 mmol/L; -0.83 to -0.15) and HbA1c (-0.36%; -0.65 to -0.07). Among those randomised to digital health interventions, there was a lower need for caesarean delivery (Relative risk: 0.81; 0.69 to 0.95; high certainty) and foetal macrosomia (0.67; 0.48 to 0.95; high certainty). Other maternal and foetal outcomes were not significantly different between both groups. Moderate to high certainty evidence support the use of digital health interventions, as these appear to improve glycaemic control and reduce the need for caesarean delivery. However, more robust evidence is needed before it can be offered as a choice to supplement or replace clinic follow up. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD42016043009.

Selection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in health systems

Many healthcare systems around the world have been increasingly using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine outcome measurement to enhance patient-centered care and incorporate the patient's perspective in health system performance evaluation. One of the key steps in using PROMs in health systems is selecting the appropriate measure(s) to serve the purpose and context of measurement. However, the availability of many PROMs makes this choice rather challenging. Our aim was to provide an integrated approach for PROM(s) selection for use by end-users in health systems.The proposed approach was based on relevant literature and existing guidebooks that addressed PROMs selection in various areas and for various purposes, as well as on our experience working with many health system users of PROMs in Canada. The proposed approach includes the following steps: (1) Establish PROMs selection committee; (2) Identify the focus, scope, and type of PROM measurement; (3) Identify potential PROM(s); (4) Review practical considerations for each of the identified PROMs; (5) Review measurement properties of shortlisted PROMs; (6) Review patient acceptance of shortlisted PROMs; (7) Recommend a PROM(s); and (8) Pilot the selected PROM(s). The selection of appropriate PROMs is one step in the successful implementation of PROMs within health systems, albeit, an essential step. We provide guidance for the selection of PROMs to satisfy all potential usages at the micro (patient-clinician), meso (organization), and macro (system) levels within the health system. Selecting PROMs that satisfy all these purposes is essential to ensure continuity and standardization of measurement over time. This is an iterative process and users should consider all the available information from all presented steps in selecting PROMs. Each of these considerations has a different weight in diverse clinical contexts and settings with various types of patients and resources.

Investigation of a Mobile Health Texting Tool for Embedding Patient-Reported Data Into Diabetes Management (i-Matter): Development and Usability Study

Background

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly being used in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) to integrate data from patients’ perspective into clinical care. To date, the majority of PRO tools have lacked patient and provider involvement in their development, thus failing to meet the unique needs of end users, and lack the technical infrastructure to be integrated into the clinic workflow.

Objective

This study aims to apply a systematic, user-centered design approach to develop i-Matter (investigating a mobile health [mHealth] texting tool for embedding patient-reported data into diabetes management), a theory-driven, mobile PRO system for patients with T2D and their primary care providers.

Methods

i-Matter combines text messaging with dynamic data visualizations that can be integrated into electronic health records (EHRs) and personalized patient reports. To build i-Matter, we conducted semistructured group and individual interviews with patients with T2D and providers, a design thinking workshop to refine initial ideas and design the prototype, and user testing sessions of prototypes using a rapid-cycle design (ie, design-test-modify-retest).

Results

Using an iterative user-centered process resulted in the identification of 6 PRO messages that were relevant to patients and providers: medication adherence, dietary behaviors, physical activity, sleep quality, quality of life, and healthy living goals. In user testing, patients recommended improvements to the wording and timing of the PRO text messages to increase clarity and response rates. Patients also recommended including motivational text messages to help sustain engagement with the program. The personalized report was regarded as a key tool for diabetes self-management by patients and providers because it aided in the identification of longitudinal patterns in the PRO data, which increased patient awareness of their need to adopt healthier behaviors. Patients recommended adding individualized tips to the journal on how they can improve their behaviors. Providers preferred having a separate tab built into the EHR that included the personalized report and highlighted key trends in patients’ PRO data over the past 3 months.

Conclusions

PRO tools that capture patients’ well-being and the behavioral aspects of T2D management are important to patients and providers. A clinical trial will test the efficacy of i-Matter in 282 patients with uncontrolled T2D.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652389; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03652389

Psychosocial benefits of insulin pump therapy in children with diabetes type 1 and their families: The pumpkin multicenter randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is on the rise among pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Metabolic effects alone cannot explain this rising popularity. From the patient's perspective, the main benefits of CSII may be found in subjective psychosocial health outcomes (patient-reported outcomes [PRO]).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In a multicenter open randomized controlled trial, children and adolescents aged 6 to16 years currently treated with multiple daily injections (MDI) were randomized 1:1, stratified by center, to either starting with CSII immediately after the baseline interview or to continuing MDI while waiting 6 months for transmission to CSII. The primary outcomes were patient-reported diabetes-specific health-related quality of life (DHRQOL) and diabetes burden of the main caregiver. Secondary outcomes were caregiver stress, fear of hypoglycemia, satisfaction with treatment, and HbA1c.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and eleven patients were randomized between February 2011 and October 2014, and 186 caregivers and 170 patients were analyzed using the intention-to-treat principle for primary outcomes. Children 8 to 11 years in the CSII group reported improved DHRQOL at follow-up compared to MDI (median difference [MD] 9.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6-16.7, P = 0.004). There were no treatment differences in the adolescent age-group 12 to 16 years (MD 2.7; 95% CI -3.2-9.5; P = 0.353). The main caregivers of the CSII group reported a significant decline of overall diabetes burden at follow-up compared to the MDI group (MD 0; 95% CI -1-0; P = 0.029). Secondary PROs also were in favor of CSII.

CONCLUSIONS

CSII has substantial psychosocial benefits. PROs demonstrate these benefits. Registered as NCT01338922 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Education and patient preferences for treating type 2 diabetes: a stratified discrete-choice experiment

PURPOSE

Diabetes is a chronic condition that is more prevalent among people with lower educational attainment. This study assessed the treatment preferences of patients with type 2 diabetes by educational attainment.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes were recruited from a national online panel in the US. Treatment preferences were assessed using a discrete-choice experiment. Participants completed 16 choice tasks in which they compared pairs of treatment profiles composed of six attributes: A1c decrease, stable blood glucose, low blood glucose, nausea, treatment burden, and out-of-pocket cost. Choice models and willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates were estimated using a conditional logit model and were stratified by educational status.

RESULTS

A total of 231 participants with a high school diploma or less education, 156 participants with some college education, and 165 participants with a college degree or more completed the survey. Participants with a college degree or more education were willing to pay more for A1c decreases ($58.84, standard error [SE]: 10.6) than participants who had completed some college ($28.47, SE: 5.53) or high school or less ($17.56, SE: 3.55) (p≤0.01). People with a college education were willing to pay more than people with high school or less to avoid nausea, low blood glucose events during the day/night, or two pills per day.

CONCLUSION

WTP for aspects of diabetes medication differed for people with a college education or more and a high school education or less. Advanced statistical methods might overcome limitations of stratification and advance understanding of preference heterogeneity for use in patient-centered benefit-risk assessments and personalized care approaches.