Background As Internet use grows, health interventions are increasingly being delivered online. Pioneering researchers are using the networking potential of the Internet, and several of them have evaluated these interventions.Objective The objective was to review the reasons why health interventions have been delivered on the Internet and to reflect on the work of the pioneers in this field in order to inform future research.Methods We conducted a qualitative systematic review of peer-reviewed evaluations of health interventions delivered to a known client/patient group using networked features of the Internet. Papers were reviewed for the reasons given for using the Internet, and these reasons were categorized.Results We included studies evaluating 28 interventions plus 9 interventions that were evaluated in pilot studies. The interventions were aimed at a range of health conditions. Reasons for Internet delivery included low cost and resource implications due to the nature of the technology; reducing cost and increasing convenience for users; reduction of health service costs; overcoming isolation of users; the need for timely information; stigma reduction; and increased user and supplier control of the intervention. A small number of studies gave the existence of Internet interventions as the only reason for undertaking an evaluation of this mode of delivery.Conclusions One must remain alert for the unintended effects of Internet delivery of health interventions due to the potential for reinforcing the problems that the intervention was designed to help. Internet delivery overcomes isolation of time, mobility, and geography, but it may not be a substitute for face-to-face contact. Future evaluations need to incorporate the evaluation of cost, not only to the health service but also to users and their social networks. When researchers report the outcomes of Internet-delivered health care interventions, it is important that they clearly state why they chose to use the Internet, preferably backing up their decision with theoretical models and exploratory work. Evaluation of the effectiveness of a health care intervention delivered by the Internet needs to include comparison with more traditional modes of delivery to answer the following question: What are the added benefits or disadvantages of Internet use that are particular to this mode of delivery?

BackgroundResearch suggests adherence to treatment recommendations is low. In type 2 diabetes, which is a chronic condition slowly leading to serious vascular, nephrologic, neurologic and ophthalmological complications, it can be assumed that enhancing adherence to treatment recommendations may lead to a reduction of complications. Treatment regimens in type 2 diabetes are complicated, encompassing lifestyle adaptations and medication intake. ObjectivesTo assess the effects of interventions for improving adherence to treatment recommendations in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Search methodsStudies were obtained from searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases supplemented with hand searches of references. Selection criteriaRandomised controlled and controlled clinical trials, before-after studies and epidemiological studies, assessing changes in adherence to treatment recommendations, as defined in the objectives section, were included. Data collection and analysisTwo teams of reviewers independently assessed the trials identified for inclusion. Three teams of two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The analysis for the narrative part was performed by one reviewer (EV), the meta-analysis by two reviewers (EV, JW). Main resultsTwenty-one studies assessing interventions aiming at improving adherence to treatment recommendations, not to diet or exercise recommendations, in people living with type 2 diabetes in primary care, outpatient settings, community and hospital settings, were included. Outcomes evaluated in these studies were heterogeneous, there was a variety of adherence measurement instruments. Nurse led interventions, home aids, diabetes education, pharmacy led interventions, adaptation of dosing and frequency of medication taking showed a small effect on a variety of outcomes including HbA1c. No data on mortality and morbidity, nor on quality of life could be found. 1 Interventions for improving adherence to treatment recommendations in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Review)

Summary Background and objective:  Pharmacists are now adopting a crucial role in the management of chronic illness in primary care, providing diabetes care and advice. This review aims to show whether a range of diabetes care interventions delivered by pharmacists is successful in improving adherence to medication. Methods:  The studies reviewed formed a subgroup of a Cochrane review on interventions to improve adherence to medication in people with type 2 diabetes. Search terms were ‘type 2 diabetes mellitus’ and ‘compliance’ or ‘adherence’. Studies were included if they assessed adherence to medical treatment specifically, rather than other aspects of self‐management. Out of the 21 studies selected for review, five described an intervention delivered by a pharmacist. Results and discussion:  Two studies reported on attempts to improve adherence focused on the taking of medication. A system of reminders and packaging improved medication adherence, but measuring medicine taking through pill counts or Medication Event Monitoring System was not effective. Three studies evaluated pharmacist‐led integrated management and education programmes designed to improve glycaemic control for under‐served patient populations. They all succeeded in lowering glycated haemoglobin, but it remains unclear whether this resulted from improved patient adherence. Conclusion:  This review indicates a potential benefit of pharmacist interventions to improve medication adherence in diabetes, especially in providing patient education.

ObjectiveTo examine the experiences of patients, health professionals and screeners; their interactions with and understandings of diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS); and how these influence uptake.DesignPurposive, qualitative design using multiperspectival, semistructured interviews and thematic analysis.SettingThree UK Screening Programme regions with different service-delivery modes, minority ethnic and deprivation levels across rural, urban and inner-city areas, in general practitioner practices and patients’ homes.Participants62 including 38 patients (22 regular-screening attenders, 16 non-regular attenders) and 24 professionals (15 primary care professionals and 9 screeners).ResultsAntecedents to attendance included knowledge about diabetic retinopathy and screening; antecedents to non-attendance included psychological, pragmatic and social factors. Confusion between photographs taken at routine eye tests and DRS photographs was identified. The differing regional invitation methods and screening locations were discussed, with convenience and transport safety being over-riding considerations for patients. Some patients mentioned significant pain and visual disturbance from mydriasis drops as a deterrent to attendance.ConclusionsIn this, the first study to consider multiperspectival experiential accounts, we identified that proactive coordination of care involving patients, primary care and screening programmes, prior to, during and after screening is required. Multiple factors, prior to, during and after screening, are involved in the attendance and non-attendance for DRS. Further research is needed to establish whether patient self-management educational interventions and the pharmacological reformulation of shorter acting mydriasis drops, may improve uptake of DRS. This might, in turn, reduce preventable vision loss and its associated costs to individuals and their families, and to health and social care providers, reducing current inequalities.

Objective To assess the benefits of involving health-care users in diabetes research.Design and participants For this qualitative case study, semistructured interviews were conducted with researchers who had worked extensively with the group. During regular meetings of the Research User Group, members discussed their views of the groupÕs effectiveness as part of the meetingÕs agenda. Interviews and discussions were transcribed, coded using N-Vivo software and analysed using constant comparative methods.