No abstract

SummaryWhat is known and objective: With the increasing prevalence of diabetes, the physician-centred model is challenged to deliver holistic care in Asia. Diabetes may be managed effectively within a multidisciplinary collaborative care model; however, evidence on its effectiveness in Asian patients is lacking. Therefore, the primary objective was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of multidisciplinary collaborative care vs physician-centred care in diabetes. The secondary objectives were to evaluate humanistic and economic outcomes among the two types of care.Methods: This 6-month prospective, open-label, parallel-arm, randomized, controlled study was conducted at four outpatient healthcare institutions. High-risk patients aged ≥21 years with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, polypharmacy and comorbidities were included. Patients with type 1 diabetes or those who were unable to communicate independently were excluded. The control arm received usual care with referrals to nurses and dietitians as needed. The intervention arm (multidisciplinary collaborative care) was followed up with pharmacists regularly, in addition to receiving the usual care. The primary outcomes included HbA1c, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein and triglycerides. The secondary outcomes included scores from the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaires (DTSQ), and diabetes-related health service utilization rates and costs.Results and discussion: Of 411 eligible patients, 214 and 197 patients were randomized into the intervention and control arms, respectively. At 6 months, 141 patients in the intervention arm (65.9%) and 189 patients in the control arm (95.9%) completed the study. Mean HbA1c reduced from 8.6%±1.5% at baseline to 8.1%±1.3% at 6 months in the intervention arm (P=.04), with up to mean HbA1c improvement of 0.8% in patients with greater levels of uncontrolled glycemia. Whereas the mean HbA1c in the control arm remained unchanged (8.5%±1.4%) throughout the 6-month period. Improvements in PAID and DTSQ scores, reduction in physician workload and an average cost savings of US$91.01 per patient were observed in the intervention arm over 6 months.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Background The efficacy of smartphone apps for improving medication adherence in type 2 diabetes is not well studied in Asian populations. Objective This study aimed to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and clinical outcomes of using a smartphone app to improve medication adherence in a multiethnic Asian population with type 2 diabetes. Methods We block randomized 51 nonadherent and digitally literate patients with type 2 diabetes between the ages of 21 and 75 years into two treatment arms (control: usual care; intervention: usual care+Medisafe app) and followed them up for 12 weeks. Recruitment occurred at a public tertiary diabetes specialist outpatient center in Singapore. The intervention group received email reminders to complete online surveys monthly, while the control group only received an email reminder(s) at the end of the study. Barriers to medication adherence and self-appraisal of diabetes were assessed using the Adherence Starts with Knowledge-12 (ASK-12) and Appraisal of Diabetes Scale (ADS) questionnaires at baseline and poststudy in both groups. Perception toward medication adherence and app usage, attitude, and satisfaction were assessed in the intervention group during and after the follow-up period. Sociodemographic data were collected at baseline. Clinical data (ie, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and total cholesterol levels) were extracted from patients’ electronic medical records. Results A total of 51 (intervention group: 25 [49%]; control group: 26 [51%]) participants were randomized, of which 41 (intervention group: 22 [88.0%]; control group: 19 [73.1%]) completed the poststudy survey. The baseline-adjusted poststudy ASK-12 score was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (mean difference: 4.7, P=.01). No changes were observed in the clinical outcomes. The average 12-week medication adherence rate of participants tracked by the app was between 38.3% and 100% in the intervention group. The majority (>80%) of the participants agreed that the app was easy to use and made them more adherent to their medication. Conclusions Our feasibility study showed that among medication-nonadherent patients with type 2 diabetes, a smartphone app intervention was acceptable, improved awareness of medication adherence, and reduced self-reported barriers to medication adherence, but did not improve clinical outcomes in a developed Asian setting.

The TGCS allows easy identification of the leading contributing patient groups. The surprisingly high contribution of group 10 suggests that our institution, a tertiary multidisciplinary teaching hospital, manages a sizeable group of high-risk patients in its obstetric case mix accounting for the high CS rate. Almost one in five term pregnancies with one previous CS had a successful vaginal delivery, suggesting that the institutional attempted VBAC rate is higher than 20%.

No abstract