Could Online Education Replace Face-to-Face Education in Diabetes? A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) is a critical component of diabetes care. This study aims to examine the effect of online-based educational interventions on diabetes management compared to face-to-face interventions.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by searching three databases for studies in English or Spanish between December 2023 and March 2024. The inclusion criteria were studies that compared face-to-face DSMES with online interventions.

RESULTS

The follow-up duration of the trials ranged from 1 to 12 months. Multidisciplinary teams delivered online DSMES through various means, including Short Message Service (SMS), telephone calls, video calls, websites, and applications. Online DSMES was found to be comparable to face-to-face interventions in terms of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In contrast, online interventions that focus on weight management in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have shown a significant reduction in HbA1c compared to face-to-face interventions. Online DSMES was found to be superior in terms of quality of life and cost-effectiveness in both T1D and T2D. None of the analyzed studies explored the differences between individual and group methodologies.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence indicates that online DSMES services provide at least comparable biomedical benefits to face-to-face interventions, suggesting that online interventions could be incorporated into clinical practice as a complement or reinforcement. However, further research is needed to explore the potential benefits and effectiveness of online group sessions in DSMES.

Feasibility and Preliminary Behavioral and Clinical Efficacy of a Diabetes Education Chatbot Pilot Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) improves diabetes outcomes yet remains consistently underutilized. Chatbot technology offers the potential to increase access to and engagement in DSMES. Evidence supporting the case for chatbot uptake and efficacy in people with diabetes (PWD) is needed.

METHOD

A diabetes education and support chatbot was deployed in a regional health care system. Adults with type 2 diabetes with an A1C of 8.0% to 8.9% and/or having recently completed a 12-week diabetes care management program were enrolled in a pilot program. Weekly chats included three elements: knowledge assessment, limited self-reporting of blood glucose data and medication taking behaviors, and education content (short videos and printable materials). A clinician facing dashboard identified need for escalation via flags based on participant responses. Data were collected to assess satisfaction, engagement, and preliminary glycemic outcomes.

RESULTS

Over 16 months, 150 PWD (majority above 50 years of age, female, and African American) were enrolled. The unenrollment rate was 5%. Most escalation flags (N = 128) were for hypoglycemia (41%), hyperglycemia (32%), and medication issues (11%). Overall satisfaction was high for chat content, length, and frequency, and 87% reported increased self-care confidence. Enrollees completing more than one chat had a mean drop in A1C of -1.04%, whereas those completing one chat or less had a mean increase in A1C of +0.09% (P = .008).

CONCLUSION

This diabetes education chatbot pilot demonstrated PWD acceptability, satisfaction, and engagement plus preliminary evidence of self-care confidence and A1C improvement. Further efforts are needed to validate these promising early findings.

Effects of a culturally tailored, family-supported, community-based self management education and support programme on clinical outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes in Western Ethiopia: A pilot randomised controlled trial

AIM

To examine the preliminary effects of a culturally tailored, family-supported, community-based diabetes self management education and support (DSMES) programme for Ethiopian people with type 2 diabetes on glycosylated haemoglobulin (HbA_1c ), blood pressure, body mass index and lipid profiles.

METHODS

A two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted involving 76 participant-caregiver dyads from Western Ethiopia, which were randomly allocated to the intervention arm to receive 12 h of DSMES intervention guided by social cognitive theory on top of usual care, or to the control group, which received usual care. While HbA_1c was a primary outcome, the blood pressure, body mass index and lipid profiles were secondary outcomes. Primary outcome was the change in HbA_1c between baseline and 2-month follow-up between the groups. Generalised estimating equations was used to test the preliminary effect of the DSMES programme on the outcomes at baseline, post-intervention and at 2-month follow-up for secondary outcomes. Cohen's d was used to estimate the between-group effect sizes of the intervention.

RESULTS

The DSMES produced significant improvement in HbA_1c with large effect size (β = -1.667, p < 0.001, d = -0.81) and triglycerides with medium effect size (d = -0.50). HbA_1c in the intervention group was decreased by 12 mmol/mol (1.1%). Although nonsignificant, the DSMES also had small to moderate effects (d = -0.123 to 0.34) on blood pressure, body mass index, total cholesterol, low-density and high-density lipoproteins when compared with usual care.

CONCLUSION

A culturally tailored, social cognitive theory-guided, family-supported, community-based DSME programme could have a benefit on HbA_1c and triglycerides. A full RCT is warranted to test the effectiveness of the DSMES programme.

Delivering diabetes shared medical appointments in primary care: early and mid-program adaptations and implications for successful implementation

BACKGROUND

Self-management is essential for good outcomes in type 2 diabetes and patients often benefit from self-management education. Shared medical appointments (SMAs) can increase self-efficacy for self management but are difficult for some primary care practices to implement. Understanding how practices adapt processes and delivery of SMAs for patients with type 2 diabetes may provide helpful strategies for other practices interested in implementing SMAs.

METHODS

The Invested in Diabetes study was a pragmatic cluster-randomized, comparative effectiveness trial designed to compare two different models of diabetes SMAs delivered in primary care. We used a multi-method approach guided by the FRAME to assess practices' experience with implementation, including any planned and unplanned adaptations. Data sources included interviews, practice observations and field notes from practice facilitator check-ins.

RESULTS

Several findings were identified from the data: 1) Modifications and adaptations are common in implementation of SMAs, 2) while most adaptations were fidelity-consistent supporting the core components of the intervention conditions as designed, some were not, 3) Adaptations were perceived to be necessary to help SMAs meet patient and practice needs and overcome implementation challenges, and 4) Content changes in the sessions were often planned and enacted to better address the contextual circumstances such as patient needs and culture.

DISCUSSION

Implementing SMAs in primary care can be challenging and adaptations of both implementation processes and content and delivery of SMAS for patients with type 2 diabetes were common in the Invested in Diabetes study. Recognizing the need for adaptations based on practice context prior to implementation may help improve fit and success with SMAs, but care needs to be given to ensure that adaptations do not weaken the impact of the intervention. Practices may be able to assess what might need to adapted for them to be successful prior to implementation but likely will continue to adapt after implementation.

CONCLUSION

Adaptations were common in the Invested in Diabetes study. Practices may benefit from understanding common challenges in implementing SMAs and adapting processes and delivery based on their own context.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov under Trial number NCT03590041, posted 18/07/2018.

2022 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

PURPOSE

The National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) provide guidance and evidence-based, quality practice for all DSMES services. Due to the dynamic nature of health care and diabetes research, the National Standards are reviewed and revised approximately every 5 years by key stakeholders and experts within the diabetes care and education community. For each revision, the Task Force is charged with reviewing the current National Standards for appropriateness, relevance, and scientific basis and making updates based on current evidence and expert consensus. In 2021, the group was tasked with reducing administrative burden related to DSMES implementation across diverse care settings.

CONCLUSION

The evidence supporting the 2022 National Standards clearly identifies the need to provide person-centered services that embrace cultural differences, social determinants of health, and the ever-increasing technological engagement platforms and systems. Payers are invited to review the National Standards as a tool to inform and modernize DSMES reimbursement requirements and to align with the evolving needs of people with diabetes (PWD) and physicians/other qualified health care professionals. The American Diabetes Association and the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists strongly advocate for health equity to ensure all PWD have access to this critical service proven to improve outcomes both related to and beyond diabetes. The 2022 National Standards update is meant to be a universal document that is easy to understand and can be implemented by the entire health care community. DSMES teams in collaboration with primary care have been shown to be the most effective approach to overcome therapeutic inertia.