Previously submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research (no longer under consideration since May 16, 2022)
Date Submitted: Apr 19, 2021
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 19, 2021 - Jun 14, 2021
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
A randomized trial to test the effectiveness of two technology-enhanced diabetes prevention programs in primary care: The DiaBEAT-it Study.
ABSTRACT
Background:
Lifestyle interventions targeting physical activity and improved eating habits have demonstrated that modest weight loss can prevent or delay the onset of type-2 diabetes. However, translation of these interventions into typical clinical programs remains a challenge.
Objective:
To evaluate the effectiveness of two technology-enhanced interventions for diabetes prevention among adults at risk for developing diabetes in a primary care setting.
Methods:
The DiaBEAT-it study employed a hybrid 2-group preference (Choice) and 3-group randomized controlled (RCT) design. This paper presents the weight related primary outcomes of the RCT arm. Patients from Southwest Virginia were identified through the Carilion Clinic electronic health records. Eligible participants (18 and older, BMI≥25, no Type 2 Diabetes) were randomized to either Choice (n=264) or RCT (n=334). RCT individuals were further randomized to one of three groups: (1) a 2-hour small group class to help patients develop a personal action plan to prevent diabetes (SC, n=117); (2) a 2-hour small group class plus automated telephone calls using an interactive voice response system (IVR) to help participants initiate weight loss through a healthful diet and regular physical activity (Class/IVR, n=110); or (3) a DVD with same content as the class plus the same IVR calls over a period of 12 months (DVD/IVR, n=107). Height was assessed with a calibrated stadiometer, weight with a calibrated Health-O-Meter stand-on scale.
Results:
Intention to treat analyses, controlling for gender, race, age and baseline BMI, showed that DVD/IVR and Class/IVR led to reductions in BMI at 6 (DVD/IVR -0.94, p<.001; Class/IVR -0.70, p<.01), 12 (DVD/IVR -0.88, p<.001; Class/IVR-0.82, p<.001) and 18 (DVD/IVR -0.78, p<.001; Class/IVR -0.58, p<.01) months. All three groups showed a significant number of participants losing at least 5% of their body weight at 12 months (DVD/IVR 26.87%; Class/IVR 21.62%; SC 16.85%). When comparing groups, DVD/IVR were significantly more likely to decrease BMI at 6 months (p<.05) and maintain the reduction at 18 months (p<.05) when compared to SC. There were no differences between the other groups.
Conclusions:
These findings suggest that both IVR delivered interventions were effective in reducing and maintaining weight reduction in a group of primary care patients at risk for developing type 2 diabetes. The DiaBEAT-it interventions show promise in responding to the need for scalable, effective methods to manage obesity and prevent diabetes in primary care settings that do not over burden primary care clinics and providers. Clinical Trial: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02162901, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02162901
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.