scholarly journals The impact of a face-to-face peer-support intervention on adults with type 2 diabetes: a cluster-randomised trial

Author(s):  
Melanie Pienaar ◽  
Marianne Reid ◽  
Mariette Nel
BMJ Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. e012185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Karagiannis ◽  
Aris Liakos ◽  
Megan E Branda ◽  
Eleni Athanasiadou ◽  
Maria Mainou ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stine Dandanell Garn ◽  
Charlotte Glümer ◽  
Sarah Fredsted Villadsen ◽  
Gritt Marie Hviid Malling ◽  
Ulla Christensen

Abstract Background: Despite increasing use and positive effects of peer support interventions, little is known about how they produce outcomes. Thus, it is essential not only to measure outcomes, but also to identify the mechanisms by which they are generated. Using a realist evaluation approach, we aimed to identify the mechanisms generating outcomes in a Danish peer support intervention for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes (peers). By investigating how the peers interacted in the intervention, we further examined how peers’ individual contextual factors facilitated or hindered the mechanisms in operation. Methods: We used a multi-method case-study design (n=9). Data included semi-structured interviews with four key groups of informants (peer, peer supporter, project manager and a diabetes nurse) for each case (n=25). Furthermore, we collected survey data from peers both before and after participation (n=9). The interview data were analysed using a systematic text condensation, and the Intervention-context-actor-mechanism-outcome framework was used to structure the analysis. Results: We identified two groups of mechanisms that improved diabetes self-management and the use of healthcare services (outcomes): ‘perceived needs and readiness’ and ‘encouragement and energy’. However, the mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes among peers with a stable occupation and financial situation, a relatively good health condition, and sufficient energy (all defined as contextual factors). Independent of these contextual factors, ‘experience of social and emotional support’ was identified as a mechanism within all peers that increased self-care awareness (defined as output). Dependent on whether the contextual factors facilitated or hindered the mechanisms to generate outcomes, we categorised the peers into those who achieved outcomes and those who did not. Conclusions: We identified two groups of mechanisms that improved the peers’ diabetes self-management and use of healthcare services. The mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes if peers’ individual contextual factors facilitated an active interaction with the elements of the intervention. However, independent of these contextual factors, a third group of mechanisms increased self-care awareness among all peers. We highlight the importance of contextual awareness of the target groups in the design and evaluation of peer support interventions for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes. Trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov, Retrospective Registration (01/20/2021), registration number NCT04722289, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04722289?term=The+Together+on+Diabetes+Intervention+-+a+Realist+Evaluation%2C&draw=2&rank=1 Keywords: Complex Intervention, Realist evaluation, Mechanisms, Context, Peer support, Diabetes self-management, Healthcare services, Inequality


Author(s):  
Paddy Gillespie ◽  
Eamon O'Shea ◽  
Gillian Paul ◽  
Tom O'Dowd ◽  
Susan M. Smith

Objectives: The aim of this study is to examine the cost-effectiveness of a group-based peer support intervention in general practice for patients with type 2 diabetes.Methods: Incremental cost utility analysis combining within trial and beyond trial components to compare the lifetime costs and benefits of alternative strategies: Control: standardized diabetes care; Intervention: group-based peer support in addition to standardized diabetes care. Within trial analysis was based on a cluster randomized controlled trial of 395 patients with type 2 diabetes in the east of Ireland. Beyond trial analysis was conducted using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model. Uncertainty was explored using a range of sensitivity analyses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated.Results: Compared with the control strategy, the intervention was associated with an increase of 0.09 (95 percent confidence interval [CI], −0.05 to 0.25) in mean quality-adjusted life-years per patient and savings of €637.43 (95 percent CI, −2455.19 to 1125.45) in mean healthcare cost per patient and €623.39 (95 percent CI, −2507.98 to 1298.49) in mean total cost per patient respectively. The likelihood of the intervention being cost-effective was appreciably higher than 80 percent for a range of potential willingness-to-pay cost-effectiveness thresholds.Conclusions: Our results suggest that while a group-based peer support intervention shows a trend toward improved risk factor management, we found no significant differences in final cost or effectiveness endpoints between intervention and control. The probabilistic results suggest that the intervention was more cost-effective, with probability values of higher than 80 percent across a range of potential cost-effectiveness threshold values.


BMJ Open ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. e007316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoki Sakane ◽  
Kazuhiko Kotani ◽  
Kaoru Takahashi ◽  
Yoshiko Sano ◽  
Kokoro Tsuzaki ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 460-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Peimani ◽  
Fateme Monjazebi ◽  
Robabeh Ghodssi-Ghassemabadi ◽  
Ensieh Nasli-Esfahani

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stine Dandanell Garn ◽  
Charlotte Glümer ◽  
Sarah Fredsted Villadsen ◽  
Gritt Marie Hviid Malling ◽  
Ulla Christensen

Abstract Background Despite an increasing use and positive effects of peer support interventions, little is known about how the outcomes are produced. Thus, it is essential not only to measure outcomes, but also to identify the mechanisms by which they are generated. Using a realist evaluation approach, we aimed to identify the mechanisms generating outcomes in a Danish peer support intervention for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes (peers). By investigating the participating peers’ interactions, we furthermore examined how their individual contextual factors either facilitated or hindered the mechanisms in operation. Methods We used a multi-method case-study design (n = 9). Data included semi-structured interviews with four key groups of informants (peer, peer supporter, project manager, and a diabetes nurse) for each case (n = 25). Furthermore, we collected survey data from peers both before and after participation (n = 9). The interview data were analysed using a systematic text condensation, and the Intervention-context-actor-mechanism-outcome framework was used to structure the analysis. Results We identified 2 groups of mechanisms that improved diabetes self-management and the use of healthcare services (outcomes): ‘perceived needs and readiness’ and ‘encouragement and energy’. However, the mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes among peers with a stable occupation and financial situation, a relatively good health condition, and sufficient energy (all defined as contextual factors). Independent of these contextual factors, ‘experience of social and emotional support’ was identified as a mechanism within all peers that increased self-care awareness (defined as output). Dependent on whether the contextual factors facilitated or hindered the mechanisms to generate outcomes, we categorised the peers into those who achieved outcomes and those who did not. Conclusions We identified two groups of mechanisms that improved the peers’ diabetes self-management and use of healthcare services. The mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes if peers’ individual contextual factors facilitated an active interaction with the elements of the intervention. However, independent of these contextual factors, a third group of mechanisms increased self-care awareness among all peers. We highlight the importance of contextual awareness of the target groups in the design and evaluation of peer support interventions for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, Retrospective Registration (20 Jan 2021), registration number NCT04722289.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stine Dandanell Garn ◽  
Charlotte Glümer ◽  
Sarah Fredsted Villadsen ◽  
Gritt Marie Hviid Malling ◽  
Ulla Christensen

Abstract Background: Despite increasing use and positive effects of peer support interventions, little is known about how they produce outcomes. Thus, it is essential not only to measure outcomes, but also to identify the mechanisms by which they are generated. Using a realist evaluation approach, we aimed to identify the mechanisms generating outcomes in a Danish peer support intervention for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes (peers). By investigating how the peers interacted in the intervention, we further examined how peers’ individual contextual factors facilitated or hindered the mechanisms in operation.Methods: We used a multi-method case-study design (n=9). Data included semi-structured interviews with four key groups of informants (peer, peer supporter, project manager and a diabetes nurse) for each case (n=25). Furthermore, we collected survey data from peers both before and after participation (n=9). The interview data were analysed using a systematic text condensation, and the Intervention-context-actor-mechanism-outcome framework was used to structure the analysis.Results: We identified two groups of mechanisms that improved diabetes self-management and the use of healthcare services (outcomes): ‘perceived needs and readiness’ and ‘encouragement and energy’. However, the mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes among peers with a stable occupation and financial situation, a relatively good health condition, and sufficient energy (all defined as contextual factors). Independent of these contextual factors, ‘experience of social and emotional support’ was identified as a mechanism within all peers that increased self-care awareness (defined as output). Dependent on whether the contextual factors facilitated or hindered the mechanisms to generate outcomes, we categorised the peers into those who achieved outcomes and those who did not. Conclusions: We identified two groups of mechanisms that improved the peers’ diabetes self-management and use of healthcare services. The mechanisms only generated the intended outcomes if peers’ individual contextual factors facilitated an active interaction with the elements of the intervention. However, independent of these contextual factors, a third group of mechanisms increased self-care awareness among all peers. We highlight the importance of contextual awareness of the target groups in the design and evaluation of peer support interventions for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Retrospective Registration (01/20/2021), registration number NCT04722289, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04722289?term=The+Together+on+Diabetes+Intervention+-+a+Realist+Evaluation%2C&draw=2&rank=1


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document