4.5 Article

Long-term biomedical and psychosocial outcomes following DAFNE (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating) structured education to promote intensive insulin therapy in adults with sub-optimally controlled Type 1 diabetes

期刊

DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
卷 89, 期 1, 页码 22-29

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.03.017

关键词

DAFNE; Structured education; Flexible intensive insulin therapy; Type 1 diabetes; Quality of life; Treatment satisfaction

资金

  1. Diabetes UK [RD9910001871, RD99/0002057, RD99/0001871, RD99/0002058]
  2. DAFNE

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To explore long-term outcomes of participation in a Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating (DAFNE) training course, which provided one-off exposure to structured education in intensive insulin therapy to people with established Type 1 diabetes. Methods: A cohort design follow-up of original trial participants at a mean of 44 months (range: 37-51 months) in hospital diabetes clinics in three English health districts. 104(74%) original participants provided biomedical data; 88(63%) completed questionnaires including the ADDQoL, measuring impact of diabetes on quality of life (QoL). Results: At 44 months, mean improvement in HbA(1c) from baseline was 0.36% (9.32 +/- 1.1% to 8.96 +/- 1.2%, p < 0.01) remaining significant but deteriorated from 12 months (p < 0.05). Improvements in QoL seen at 12 months were sustained at 44 (e.g. impact of diabetes on dietary freedom: -1.78 +/- 2.33 at 44 months versus -4.27 +/- 2.94, baseline, p < 0.0001; versus 1.80 +/- 2.32 at 12 months, ns). Similar results were obtained using last observation carried forward for patients not supplying follow-up data. Conclusions: The impact of a single DAFNE course on glycaemic control remains apparent in the long term, although further interventions will be required to achieve recommended HbA(1c). In contrast, improvements in QoL and other patient-reported outcomes are well maintained over approximately 4 years. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据