Skip to content

The Effectiveness of Intervention on Insulin Injection

The Effectiveness of Intervention on Insulin Injection in Insulin-naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Application of the Transtheoretical Model

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03324451
Enrollment
151
Registered
2017-10-27
Start date
2018-03-01
Completion date
2020-03-01
Last updated
2020-09-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Brief summary

The aim of the study is to assess the effectiveness of an intervention for insulin injection initiation based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) for insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Detailed description

According to the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) proposed by Prochaska and Diclemente, people will experience different stages of change before the actual behavioral change takes place. Ineffectiveness of intervention to instigate behavioral change is largely due to failure to take into account the stage of change in which individuals are. The TTM suggests that decisional balance, which reflects the relative difference between pros and cons, is important for influencing the stage of change. In order to achieve behavioral change, the perceived pros of changing must be strengthened to outweigh the cons. In addition, individual must be self-convinced that the behavioral change is important for themselves. Furthermore, the process for behavioral change can be provided to facilitate behavioral change in individuals. The theory of TTM has yet been used to improve the behavior of insulin initiation in insulin-naïve patients with T2DM. Thus, this study aims to assess the effectiveness of an intervention for insulin injection initiation based on the TTM in insulin-naïve patients with T2DM.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALTTM Intervention for Insulin Initiation

The intervention contains two parts: (1) individual intervention; (2) insulin injection follow-up management. Different intervention strategies are applied to patients according to their stages of change.

BEHAVIORALUsual care

Regular patient education on insulin injection at the control arm hospital.

Sponsors

Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Patients with T2DM at a clinic in southern Taiwan are assigned to the intervention arm, whereas patients with T2DM at the endocrinology department of a hospital in northern Taiwan are placed in the control arm. Eligible patients that match the inclusion criteria are recommended by doctors to initiate insulin treatment. Research assistants will explain the objectives of this study to eligible participants. Subsequently, baseline data will be collected from participants by research assistants after the participants sign the consent forms. Afterwards, the participants in the intervention arm will receive the intervention. For the control arm, the participants will receive regular patient education originally administered at the hospital.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

(1) diagnosed with T2DM for at least half a year; (2) aged 20-70 years old; (3) controlling diabetes only through oral medication, without previous experience in insulin injection; (4) HbA1c≧8.5% as measured more than twice in a year; (5) considered suitable and recommended by the doctor to initiate insulin injection.

Exclusion criteria

(1) unable to communicate with language; (2) incapable of self-administering insulin injection due to visual or muscular impairment.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) LevelsAt baseline and 12 months after the interventionCollected from blood test to assess the Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Diabetes Empowerment ProcessAt baseline and 12 months after the interventionA 13-item Chinese version of the Diabetes Empowerment Process Scale was used to assess the perceived level of empowerment by healthcare providers in participants. Each item was rated on a 5-point scale with scores ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The total score range from 13 to 65. A higher score indicated higher perceived patient empowerment.
Change in Diabetes DistressAt baseline and 12 months after the interventionAn 8-item Chinese version of the short-form Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale was used to assess the levels of diabetes distress in participants. The response of each item was rated from 0 (not a problem) to 4 (serious problem). The total score ranged from 8 to 32. A higher score represented severer diabetes distress.
Change in Quality of LifeAt baseline and 12 months after the interventionA 15-item Diabetes-Specific Quality-of-Life Scale was used to assess the subjective appraisal of participants in their perceived degree to which their current health-related aspects in life were affected by emotional suffering, social functioning, adherence to treatment regimen, and diabetic-specific symptoms. Each item was rated from very much (0 point) to not at all (4 points). The total score ranged from 0 to 60. A higher score indicated better quality of life.
Change in Body Mass IndexAt baseline and 12 months after the interventionPhysiological parameter which will be collected from body weight scale and height scale, and will be converted to body mass index (weight (kg)/ height(m) 2

Countries

Taiwan

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Intervention Arm
The arm that receives TTM Intervention for Insulin Initiation. The intervention contains three parts: (1) individual intervention; (2) insulin injection follow-up management TTM Intervention for Insulin Initiation: The intervention contains two parts: (1) individual intervention; (2) insulin injection follow-up management. Different intervention strategies are applied to patients according to their stages of change.
97
Control Arm
The arm that receives usual care from the hospital that hosts the control arm. Participants in the control arm receives regular patient education. Usual care: Regular patient education on insulin injection at the control arm hospital.
54
Total151

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicControl ArmTotalIntervention Arm
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
16 Participants43 Participants27 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
25 Participants63 Participants38 Participants
Age, Continuous60.02 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.49
60.57 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.24
60.91 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.3
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Taiwan
54 Participants151 Participants97 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
23 Participants53 Participants30 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
18 Participants53 Participants35 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 970 / 54
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 970 / 54
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 970 / 54

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Levels

Collected from blood test to assess the Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels

Time frame: At baseline and 12 months after the intervention

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention ArmChange in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Levels-1.47 percent of glycosylated HbStandard Deviation 2.23
Control ArmChange in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Levels-2.00 percent of glycosylated HbStandard Deviation 2.29
Secondary

Change in Body Mass Index

Physiological parameter which will be collected from body weight scale and height scale, and will be converted to body mass index (weight (kg)/ height(m) 2

Time frame: At baseline and 12 months after the intervention

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention ArmChange in Body Mass Index1.06 Kg/m^2Standard Deviation 1.61
Control ArmChange in Body Mass Index0.85 Kg/m^2Standard Deviation 1.81
Secondary

Change in Diabetes Distress

An 8-item Chinese version of the short-form Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale was used to assess the levels of diabetes distress in participants. The response of each item was rated from 0 (not a problem) to 4 (serious problem). The total score ranged from 8 to 32. A higher score represented severer diabetes distress.

Time frame: At baseline and 12 months after the intervention

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention ArmChange in Diabetes Distress-2.91 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.16
Control ArmChange in Diabetes Distress-3.63 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.76
Secondary

Change in Diabetes Empowerment Process

A 13-item Chinese version of the Diabetes Empowerment Process Scale was used to assess the perceived level of empowerment by healthcare providers in participants. Each item was rated on a 5-point scale with scores ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The total score range from 13 to 65. A higher score indicated higher perceived patient empowerment.

Time frame: At baseline and 12 months after the intervention

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention ArmChange in Diabetes Empowerment Process0.52 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.13
Control ArmChange in Diabetes Empowerment Process-2.13 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.99
Secondary

Change in Quality of Life

A 15-item Diabetes-Specific Quality-of-Life Scale was used to assess the subjective appraisal of participants in their perceived degree to which their current health-related aspects in life were affected by emotional suffering, social functioning, adherence to treatment regimen, and diabetic-specific symptoms. Each item was rated from very much (0 point) to not at all (4 points). The total score ranged from 0 to 60. A higher score indicated better quality of life.

Time frame: At baseline and 12 months after the intervention

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention ArmChange in Quality of Life2.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.51
Control ArmChange in Quality of Life5.45 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.86

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026