Premium
Walking Away from Type 2 diabetes: a cluster randomized controlled trial
Author(s) -
Yates T.,
Edwardson C. L.,
Henson J.,
Gray L. J.,
Ashra N. B.,
Troughton J.,
Khunti K.,
Davies M. J.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
diabetic medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.474
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1464-5491
pISSN - 0742-3071
DOI - 10.1111/dme.13254
Subject(s) - medicine , pedometer , randomized controlled trial , ambulatory , confidence interval , physical therapy , type 2 diabetes , cluster randomised controlled trial , imputation (statistics) , diabetes mellitus , physical activity , missing data , endocrinology , machine learning , computer science
Aims This study aimed to investigate whether an established behavioural intervention, Walking Away from Type 2 Diabetes, is effective at promoting and sustaining increased walking activity when delivered within primary care. Methods Cluster randomized controlled trial involving 10 general practices recruited from Leicestershire, UK , in 2009–2010. Eight hundred and eight (36% female) individuals with a high risk of Type 2 diabetes mellitus, identified through a validated risk score, were included. Participants in five practices were randomized to Walking Away from Type 2 Diabetes, a pragmatic 3‐h group‐based structured education programme incorporating pedometer use with annual follow‐on refresher sessions. The primary outcome was accelerometer assessed ambulatory activity (steps/day) at 12 months. Longer term maintenance was assessed at 24 and 36 months. Results were analysed using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering. Results Complete accelerometer data for the primary outcome were available for 571 (71%) participants. Increases in ambulatory activity of 411 steps/day [95% confidence interval ( CI ): 117, 704] and self‐reported vigorous‐intensity physical activity of 218 metabolic equivalent min/week (95% CI : 6, 425) at 12 months were observed in the intervention group compared with control; differences between groups were not sustained at 36 months. No differences between groups were observed for markers of cardiometabolic health. Replacing missing data with multiple imputation did not affect the results. Conclusions A pragmatic low‐resource group‐based structured education programme with pedometer use resulted in modest increases in ambulatory activity compared with control conditions after 12 months when implemented within a primary care setting to those at high risk of Type 2 diabetes mellitus; however, the results were not maintained over 36 months.