Key result
New RCT protocol evaluates guided self-determination versus attention control for diabetes distress at 12 months.
Why the study?
Autonomy-supporting interventions may improve long-term type 2 diabetes management, but previous trials showed uncertainty regarding the guided self-determination method.
Does a guided self-determination intervention improve diabetes distress in adults with type 2 diabetes?
RCT (n=224)
randomised
Yes
Does a guided self-determination intervention improve diabetes distress in adults with type 2 diabetes?
This is a protocol for a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of a guided self-determination intervention on diabetes distress in adults with type 2 diabetes.
Protocol for RCT of guided self-determination now active; leaves open its effect on diabetes distress in type 2 diabetes.
Introduction In the management of type 2 diabetes, autonomy-supporting interventions may be a prerequisite to achieving more long-term improvement. Preliminary evidence has shown that the guided self-determination (GSD) method might have an effect on haemoglobin A1c and diabetes distress in people with type 1 diabetes. Previous trials were at risk of uncertainty. Thus, the objective is to investigate the benefits and harms of a GSD intervention versus an attention control group intervention in adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysis This trial protocol is guided by the The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for International Trials Statement. We describe the protocol for a pragmatic randomised, dual-centre, parallel-group, superiority clinical trial testing a GSD intervention versus an attention control for people with type 2 diabetes in outpatient clinics. The participants (n=224) will be recruited from two diverse regions of Denmark. The experimental stepped-care intervention will consist of three to five GSD sessions lasting up to 1 hour with a trained GSD facilitator. The sessions will be conducted face to face, by video conference or over the telephone. The attention controls will receive three to five sessions lasting up to an hour with a communication-trained healthcare professional provided face to-face, by video conference, or over the telephone. Participants will be included if they have type 2 diabetes,>18 years old, are not pregnant. Participants will be assessed before randomisation, at 5-month, and 12-month follow-up, the latter being the primary. The primary outcome is diabetes distress. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, depressive symptoms and non-serious adverse events. Exploratory outcomes are haemoglobin A1c, motivation and serious adverse events. Data will be collected using REDCap and analysed using Stata V.16.Ethics and dissemination The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol, the Helsinki Declaration in its latest form, International Harmonisation of Good Clinical Practice guidelines and the applicable regulatory requirement(s). The trial has been approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (P-2020-864). The Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark reviewed the trial protocol, but exempted the trial protocol from full review (H-20003638). The results of the trial will be presented at the outpatient clinics treating people with type 2 diabetes, at national and international conferences as well as to associations for people with diabetes and their relatives.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04601311.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gluud et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in type 2 diabetes (n=224). Guided self-determination (GSD) intervention vs. Attention control was evaluated on Diabetes distress at 12-month follow-up. This protocol describes a randomized clinical trial of 224 adults with type 2 diabetes to evaluate a guided self-determination intervention versus attention control on diabetes distress at 12 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: