Automated Calls With Nurse Follow-Up to Improve Diabetes Ambulatory Care
NCT ID: NCT00012753
Last Updated: 2015-04-07
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
272 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
1999-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Translating Telephonic Diabetes Self-management Support to Primary Care Practice
NCT02137720
Advanced Comprehensive Diabetes Care for Veterans With Poorly-Controlled Diabetes
NCT01778751
The Diabetes TeleCare Study
NCT00288132
Improving Insulin Therapy With Enhanced Care Management
NCT00320112
Improving Diabetes Outcomes With Activity, Nutrition and Medication
NCT00179374
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Regular outpatient follow-up is important for all diabetes patients, with some needing frequent attention because their health is unstable, their treatment regimen is complex, or their social supports are inadequate. However, many patients live with access barriers that limit their use of outpatient services, fail to attend outpatient appointments, and experience worse outcomes than trials of aggressive management suggest is possible. Although labor-intensive, telephone care programs are one potential strategy for bringing diabetes management services into patients� homes and improving their glycemic control. Automated telephone disease management (ATDM) systems can augment telephone care by providing frequent monitoring and health education to large patient panels while focusing clinicians� attention on individuals who need it most. Although this technology has shown some promise, it has not been rigorously evaluated, particularly in VA.
Objectives:
This study evaluated Automated Telephone Disease Management (ATDM) calls with telephone nurse follow-up as a means of improving the quality of VA diabetes care. Specifically, we will determine whether this service improves patients' glucose control; improves other important outcomes such as their quality of life, satisfaction with care, and health service use; improves health behaviors such as self-monitoring of blood glucose, fat intake, and medication adherence; and has effects that vary across patient subgroups.
Methods:
Patients with diabetes mellitus using hypoglycemic medication were enrolled during outpatient visits to a university-affiliated VA health care system and randomized to usual care or bi-weekly ATDM assessment and self-care education calls with follow-up by a nurse educator. The intervention process was evaluated by examining patients� patterns of ATDM use and the reliability and validity of information they provided. Telephone surveys were used to measure intervention effects at 12-months on patients� self-care, symptoms, satisfaction with care, and perceived access barriers. The impact on VA utilization was evaluated using electronic utilization databases, and glycemic control was measured using laboratory tests. A total of 292 patients were randomized and 272 (93%) provided data at 12-months. Intervention patients completed ATDM assessments consistently throughout the observation period and the assessments identified groups of intervention patients with varying degrees of health risk at baseline. Compared to control patients, intervention patients at 12-months reported more frequent glucose self-monitoring, fewer access problems, and greater satisfaction with care (all p = 0.05). Intervention patients were more likely than controls to have been seen in podiatry clinics (53% versus 31%, p = 0.003) and diabetes specialty clinics (31% versus 17%, p = 0.03) during the study. The intervention did not influence mean endpoint HgA1c levels overall. However, among patients with baseline HgA1c = 8%, mean endpoint values among intervention and control patients were 8.7% and 9.2%, respectively (p = 0.05); intervention effects were even greater among patients with baseline HgA1c = 9%. Moreover, intervention patients at follow-up reported fewer symptoms of poor glycemic control than patients receiving usual care (3.6 versus 4.4, p = 0.03).
Status:
Completed.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Arm 1
Automated telephone health status assessments with nurse follow-up.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Automated telephone health status assessments with nurse follow-up.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
18 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
US Department of Veterans Affairs
FED
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
John D. Piette, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA
Palo Alto, Michigan, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Piette JD, McPhee SJ, Weinberger M, Mah CA, Kraemer FB. Use of automated telephone disease management calls in an ethnically diverse sample of low-income patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1999 Aug;22(8):1302-9. doi: 10.2337/diacare.22.8.1302.
Piette JD. Patient education via automated calls: a study of English and Spanish speakers with diabetes. Am J Prev Med. 1999 Aug;17(2):138-41. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(99)00061-6.
Piette JD. Satisfaction with automated telephone disease management calls and its relationship to their use. Diabetes Educ. 2000 Nov-Dec;26(6):1003-10. doi: 10.1177/014572170002600613.
Piette JD. Perceived access problems among patients with diabetes in two public systems of care. J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Nov;15(11):797-804. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.91107.x.
Piette JD, Weinberger M, Kraemer FB, McPhee SJ. Impact of automated calls with nurse follow-up on diabetes treatment outcomes in a Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care System: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2001 Feb;24(2):202-8. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.2.202.
Piette JD. Interactive voice response systems in the diagnosis and management of chronic disease. Am J Manag Care. 2000 Jul;6(7):817-27.
Piette JD. Satisfaction with care among patients with diabetes in two public health care systems. Med Care. 1999 Jun;37(6):538-46. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199906000-00003.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IIR 95-084
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.