Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To develop, implement and compare two lifestyle services for people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Two localities were selected to implement two different service delivery models, telephone-based and face-to-face, supporting people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Impact was assessed by comparing weight, fasting plasma glucose and oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results at baseline and six months later. RESULTS: Both services were associated with an improvement in OGTT 2-h plasma glucose and weight. In the telephone intervention, 47.3% of participants who completed the project achieved both normal fasting plasma glucose (≤6.0 mmol/l) and normal plasma glucose levels (≤7.7 mmol/l). Participants had a mean weight loss of 3.3 kg (SD 4.3), equating to 3.4% of body weight (p < 0.001). In the face-to-face intervention, 46.3% of participants achieved normal plasma glucose (≤7.7 mmol/l) and a mean weight loss of 2.9 kg (SD 4.5), equating to 3.1% of bodyweight (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Local health providers can adapt existing service provision and tailor it to provide lifestyle programmes for people with impaired glucose tolerance. Both service delivery models offer effective diabetes prevention although each model may cater for different population needs and a choice of services might be the preferred option.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Betzlbacher et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: