Shared Decision Making Between Patients and GPs in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care.

NCT02285881 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: NL39039.041.11
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 153
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Background: Less than 20% of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients in different healthcare settings achieve all treatment goals to prevent cardiometabolic disease. A more personalised approach with shared decision making should increase that percentage. Because the ADDITION-Europe study demonstrated two (almost) equally effective treatments but with slightly different intensities, it may be a good starting point to discuss with the patients their diabetes treatment, taking into account both the intensity of treatment, clinical factors and patients' preferences. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether such an approach increases the proportion of treatment goals that T2DM patients achieve. Methods: In a cluster-randomised trial in 40 primary care practices that participated until 2009 in the ADDITION Study, 150 T2DM patients 60 - 80 years, known with T2DM for 8-15 years, will be included. Practices are randomised a second time, i.e. intervention practices in the ADDITION study could be control practices in the current study and vice versa. For the GPs from the intervention group a 2-hour training in shared decision making (SDM) was developed as well as a decision support tool to use during the consultation. These GPs plan the first visit with the patients to decide on the intensity of the treatment, personalised targets and the priorities of treatment. The control group will continue with the treatment they were allocated to in the ADDITION study (treatment-as-before). Follow-up: 24 months. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who achieve all three treatment goals (HbA1c, blood pressure, total cholesterol) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes are the proportion of patients who achieve five treatment goals (HbA1c, blood pressure, total cholesterol , body weight, not smoking), evaluation of the SDM process (SDM-Q9), satisfaction with the treatment (DTSQ), wellbeing and quality of life (W-BQ12, ADD QoL-19), health status (SF-36, EQ-5D) and coping (DCMQ). The proportions of achieved treatment goals will be compared between groups by estimating the relative risk of meeting the treatment targets. For the secondary outcomes mixed models will be used. Discussion: To achieve optimal diabetes care with a higher proportion of achieved individualised treatment goals, the SDM approach including a multi-faceted decision support tool might be useful. An intervention with such a support decision tool is designed.

Conditions

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Keywords

diabetes treatment; personalized medicine; shared decision making; goal setting

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• The between groups difference in the proportion of patients which achieve the treatment goals for HbA1c, blood pressure, and total cholesterol

  The proportions of achieved treatment goals of HbA1c, blood pressure, total cholesterol within each study group will by estimated by calculating relative risk. Intention-to-treat analyses (ITT) will be performed to examine between-group differences.

  after 12 months

Secondary Outcomes (7)

• The difference between groups in the proportion of patients which achieved the five treatment goals for HbA1c, blood pressure, total cholesterol, body weight, and smoking.

  after 24 months

• Characteristics of success for the SDM process in the patients in the intervention group.

  after 24 months

• The difference in health related Quality of Life between both groups at 24 months as measured with the Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life and the European Quality of Life questionnaire.

  after 24 months

• The difference in health status between both groups at 24 months as measured with the Short Form-36.

  after 24 months

• The difference in well-being between baseline and 24 months within and between both groups as measured with the Well-Being Questionnaire.

  after 24 months

Other Outcomes (1)

• Process evaluation of the shared decision making ability of the general practitioners by using the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire.

  at 24 months

Study Arms (2)

shared decision making

EXPERIMENTAL

In the intervention practices the SDM process is used. In the SDM proces the patient and GP use a decision aid to discuss the pros and cons of two evidence based treatment possibilities, according to the Dutch College of General Practitioners (NHG) versus the ADDITION guideline, and the patients' preferences for either of these treatments. Together they choose one of these treatments, and set the five treatment targets (blood pressure, cholesterol, HbA1c, smoking status and weight) in order of priority. Subsequent treatment will take place according to the priorities of these OPTIMAL treatment targets. The priorities will be evaluated every 12 months.

Behavioral: Shared decision making

control group

NO INTERVENTION

Patients in the control practices will receive treatment-as-before, which means that the patients will not be offered the structured SDM process. So the GP will treat the former ADDITION patients as they were used during the period that followed after the ADDITION study (2009), either according to the national guidelines or to the ADDITION intensive treatment algorithm.

Interventions

Shared decision making BEHAVIORAL

In the intervention practices the SDM process is used. In the SDM proces the patient and GP use a decision aid to discuss the pros and cons of two evidence based treatment possibilities, according to the Dutch College of General Practitioners (NHG) versus the ADDITION guideline, and the patients' preferences for either of these treatments. Together they choose one of these treatments, and set the five treatment targets (blood pressure, cholesterol, HbA1c, smoking status and weight) in order of priority. Subsequent treatment will take place according to the priorities of these OPTIMAL treatment targets. The priorities will be evaluated every 12 months.

shared decision making

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 60 Years - 80 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Two more or less comparable categories of patients are eligible: 1. if diagnosed with T2DM in 2002-2004 by screening, aged between 50-70 years at that time and having participated in the ADDITION-study that ended in 2009; 2. treated for their T2DM in a practice that participated in the ADDITION study, between 60 and 80 years in 2012-2014 and with a T2DM duration between 8 to 15 years.

You may not qualify if:

• Patients will be excluded if they have a history of alcoholism, drug abuse, psychosis, personality disorder or another emotional, psychological or intellectual problem that is likely to invalidate informed consent, or limit the ability of the individual to comply with the protocol requirements and patients with a limited life expectancy.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• UMC Utrecht: lead

Study Sites (1)

Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care

Utrecht, 3584CG, Netherlands

Location

Related Publications (5)

• Griffin SJ, Borch-Johnsen K, Davies MJ, Khunti K, Rutten GE, Sandbaek A, Sharp SJ, Simmons RK, van den Donk M, Wareham NJ, Lauritzen T. Effect of early intensive multifactorial therapy on 5-year cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes detected by screening (ADDITION-Europe): a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2011 Jul 9;378(9786):156-67. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60698-3. Epub 2011 Jun 24.

  PMID: 21705063 BACKGROUND

• Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, Diamant M, Ferrannini E, Nauck M, Peters AL, Tsapas A, Wender R, Matthews DR; American Diabetes Association (ADA); European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2012 Jun;35(6):1364-79. doi: 10.2337/dc12-0413. Epub 2012 Apr 19. No abstract available.

  PMID: 22517736 BACKGROUND

• Stiggelbout AM, Van der Weijden T, De Wit MP, Frosch D, Legare F, Montori VM, Trevena L, Elwyn G. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ. 2012 Jan 27;344:e256. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e256.

  PMID: 22286508 BACKGROUND

• Wilkinson MJ, Nathan AG, Huang ES. Personalized decision support in type 2 diabetes mellitus: current evidence and future directions. Curr Diab Rep. 2013 Apr;13(2):205-12. doi: 10.1007/s11892-012-0348-6.

  PMID: 23160795 BACKGROUND

• den Ouden H, Vos RC, Reidsma C, Rutten GE. Shared decision making in type 2 diabetes with a support decision tool that takes into account clinical factors, the intensity of treatment and patient preferences: design of a cluster randomised (OPTIMAL) trial. BMC Fam Pract. 2015 Feb 27;16:27. doi: 10.1186/s12875-015-0230-0.

  PMID: 25887759 DERIVED

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Diabetes Mellitus; Glucose Metabolism Disorders; Metabolic Diseases; Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases; Endocrine System Diseases

Study Officials

• Guy EH Rutten, MD PhD

  Julius Centre

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: PhD

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: September 5, 2014
• First Posted: November 7, 2014
• Study Start: March 1, 2012
• Primary Completion: March 1, 2015
• Study Completion: February 1, 2016
• Last Updated: May 13, 2016

Record last verified: 2016-05

Locations

NL (1)