BMC Endocrine Disorders (Jul 2024)
The effect of USM-IAM-based counselling vs standard counselling on insulin adherence, FBS and HbA1c among patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM): a randomised controlled trial
Abstract
Abstract Background Many patients with T2DM on insulin are not optimally controlled despite receiving standard diabetes education counselling. Poor insulin adherence may be a contributing factor. We developed and evaluated a new module [Universiti Sains Malaysia-Insulin Adherence Module (USM-IAM)] on insulin-treated patients with poorly controlled diabetes. Methods Eligibility criteria are those diagnosed with T2DM, aged between 18 and 65 years, with HbA1c between 8 and 15% and on insulin therapy for 1 year. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either the USM-IAM-based counselling or the standard counselling (SC) at baseline and the second visit. Patients were instructed to adjust insulin doses based on blood glucose levels. Outcomes were changes in adherence score, FBS and HbA1c levels from baseline to 3 months and baseline to sixth month. Results Ninety patients were randomised to each group. The baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were homogenous among groups. Ninety patients were analysed for each group. Adherence score changes between baseline to 3 months were − 8.30 (− 11.47, − 5.14) in USM-IAM-based counselling group (USM-IAM) and − 7.64 (− 10.89, − 4.40) in standard counselling group (SCG), between baseline to sixth month were − 10.21 (− 13.40, − 7.03) in USM-IAM and − 10.79 (− 14.64, − 6.97) in SCG. FBS changes between baseline to 3 months were 1.374 (0.25, 2.50) in USM-IAM and 0.438 (− 0.66, 1.54) in SCG, and between baseline to sixth month were 1.713 (0.473, 2.95) in USM-IAM and 0.998 (− 0.02, 2.01) in SCG. HbA1c changes between baseline to 3 months were 1.374 (0.25, 2.50) in USM-IAM and 0.547 (0.12, 0.98) in SCG, and between baseline to sixth month were 1.03 (0.65, 1.41) in USM-IAM and 0.617 (0.20, 1.03) in SCG. Between-subjects effects for all outcomes were not statistically significant. Conclusion Both groups had significant improvements in adherence score and HbA1c with time, with higher improvement in patients receiving the USM-IAM. FBS reductions were significant in the intervention group but not in the control group. Trial registration This study protocol is registered with Clicaltrials.gov with ID NCT05125185 dated 17th November 2021.
Keywords
