Open AccessPsycho-educational interventions for children and young people with Type 1 Diabetes in the UK: How effective are they? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Author(s) -
Dimitrios Charalampopoulos,
Kathryn R. Hesketh,
Rakesh Amin,
Veena Mazarello Paes,
Russell Viner,
Terence Stephenson
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0179685
Subject(s) - meta analysis , psychological intervention , type 2 diabetes , medicine , medline , type 1 diabetes , diabetes mellitus , gerontology , pediatrics , psychiatry , biology , endocrinology , biochemistry
Aims To synthesise evidence from UK-based randomised trials of psycho-educational interventions in children and young people (CYP) with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) to inform the evidence-base for adoption of such interventions into the NHS. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science up to March 2016. Two reviewers independently selected UK-based randomised trials comparing psycho-educational interventions for improving management of T1D for CYP with a control group of usual care or attention control. The main outcome was glycaemic control measured by percentage of glycated haemoglobin (HbA 1c ); secondary outcomes included psychosocial functioning, diabetes knowledge, adverse and other clinical outcomes. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted. Pooled effect sizes of standardised mean difference (SMD) were calculated. Results Ten eligible trials of three educational and seven psycho-educational interventions were identified. Most interventions were delivered by non-psychologists and targeted adolescents with more than one year duration of diabetes. Meta-analysis of nine of these trials (N = 1,838 participants) showed a non-significant reduction in HbA 1c attributable to the intervention (pooled SMD = -0.06, 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.09). Psycho-educational interventions aiming to increase children’s self-efficacy had a moderate, beneficial effect (SMD = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.87). No benefits on diabetes knowledge and other indicators of psychosocial functioning were identified. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of particular psycho-educational programme for CYP with T1D in the UK. Further trials with sufficient power and reporting standards are needed. Future trials could consider active involvement of psychological specialists in the delivery of psychologically informed interventions and implementation of psycho-educational interventions earlier in the course of the disease. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42015010701