SUGAR握手干预预防老年2型糖尿病患者低血糖:一项实用随机对照试验的过程评估

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Huda Y Almomani, Helen M Ayre, Richard A Powell, Keivan Armani
{"title":"SUGAR握手干预预防老年2型糖尿病患者低血糖:一项实用随机对照试验的过程评估","authors":"Huda Y Almomani, Helen M Ayre, Richard A Powell, Keivan Armani","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-06361-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The SUGAR Handshake is a pharmacist-led educational intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A process evaluation was conducted alongside the ROSE-ADAM pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the implementation of the intervention and study procedures, explore mechanisms of impact, and examine future scalability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed-methods process evaluation was nested within a single-centre RCT conducted at outpatient clinics in a Jordanian hospital. Routine monitoring quantitative data assessed adherence to the intervention components and study activities, and estimated reach. Qualitative data, collected through semi-structured interviews with 12 purposively selected participants on Days 45 and 90 of enrolment, captured experiences with the intervention and usual care. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data; descriptive statistics and inferential tests were applied to quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention was well implemented: 104 of 106 participants (98.11%) continued the full intervention, with a 100% reach to those enrolled in the trial. Participants showed high adherence to study activities (mean ± SD: 88.07 ± 9.33 documented days on diaries; 77.97 ± 18.87 fasting blood glucose measurements). Intervention reach was 100%. Participants described the intervention as informative, easy to follow, and helpful in avoiding hypoglycaemia and the side-effects of antidiabetic medications. Key facilitators included trust in pharmacists, altruism, and social support. Reported barriers were people's health status, age-related conditions, and stress.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This process evaluation highlights the SUGAR Handshake's potential for broader implementation and scale-up. By addressing identified barriers, future educational interventions may enhance adherence, improve patient outcomes, and advance hypoglycaemia management in diabetes care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04081766), registration date 4,920,219.</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"753"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486974/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The SUGAR handshake intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes: process evaluation within a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Huda Y Almomani, Helen M Ayre, Richard A Powell, Keivan Armani\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12877-025-06361-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The SUGAR Handshake is a pharmacist-led educational intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A process evaluation was conducted alongside the ROSE-ADAM pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the implementation of the intervention and study procedures, explore mechanisms of impact, and examine future scalability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed-methods process evaluation was nested within a single-centre RCT conducted at outpatient clinics in a Jordanian hospital. Routine monitoring quantitative data assessed adherence to the intervention components and study activities, and estimated reach. Qualitative data, collected through semi-structured interviews with 12 purposively selected participants on Days 45 and 90 of enrolment, captured experiences with the intervention and usual care. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data; descriptive statistics and inferential tests were applied to quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention was well implemented: 104 of 106 participants (98.11%) continued the full intervention, with a 100% reach to those enrolled in the trial. Participants showed high adherence to study activities (mean ± SD: 88.07 ± 9.33 documented days on diaries; 77.97 ± 18.87 fasting blood glucose measurements). Intervention reach was 100%. Participants described the intervention as informative, easy to follow, and helpful in avoiding hypoglycaemia and the side-effects of antidiabetic medications. Key facilitators included trust in pharmacists, altruism, and social support. Reported barriers were people's health status, age-related conditions, and stress.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This process evaluation highlights the SUGAR Handshake's potential for broader implementation and scale-up. By addressing identified barriers, future educational interventions may enhance adherence, improve patient outcomes, and advance hypoglycaemia management in diabetes care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04081766), registration date 4,920,219.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"753\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486974/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06361-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06361-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:SUGAR Handshake是一项药剂师主导的教育干预,旨在预防老年2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者的低血糖。过程评估与ROSE-ADAM实用随机对照试验(RCT)一起进行,以评估干预和研究程序的实施情况,探索影响机制,并检查未来的可扩展性。方法:在约旦一家医院门诊进行的单中心随机对照试验中,采用混合方法进行过程评价。常规监测定量数据评估了干预成分和研究活动的依从性,并估计了覆盖范围。在入组的第45天和第90天,通过对12名有目的选择的参与者的半结构化访谈收集了定性数据,收集了干预和常规护理的经验。定性数据采用专题分析;定量资料采用描述性统计和推理检验。结果:干预得到了很好的实施:106名参与者中有104名(98.11%)继续进行了全面干预,100%达到了参加试验的人。参与者表现出对研究活动的高依从性(平均±SD: 88.07±9.33记录在日记中的天数;77.97±18.87空腹血糖测量)。干预率为100%。参与者描述干预是信息丰富,易于遵循,并有助于避免低血糖和抗糖尿病药物的副作用。主要的促进因素包括对药剂师的信任、利他主义和社会支持。报告的障碍是人们的健康状况、与年龄有关的条件和压力。结论:该过程评估突出了SUGAR Handshake在更广泛实施和扩大规模方面的潜力。通过解决已确定的障碍,未来的教育干预可能会增强依从性,改善患者预后,并推进糖尿病护理中的低血糖管理。试验注册:Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04081766),注册日期4,920,219。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The SUGAR handshake intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes: process evaluation within a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

The SUGAR handshake intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes: process evaluation within a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

The SUGAR handshake intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes: process evaluation within a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Background: The SUGAR Handshake is a pharmacist-led educational intervention to prevent hypoglycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A process evaluation was conducted alongside the ROSE-ADAM pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the implementation of the intervention and study procedures, explore mechanisms of impact, and examine future scalability.

Methods: This mixed-methods process evaluation was nested within a single-centre RCT conducted at outpatient clinics in a Jordanian hospital. Routine monitoring quantitative data assessed adherence to the intervention components and study activities, and estimated reach. Qualitative data, collected through semi-structured interviews with 12 purposively selected participants on Days 45 and 90 of enrolment, captured experiences with the intervention and usual care. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data; descriptive statistics and inferential tests were applied to quantitative data.

Results: The intervention was well implemented: 104 of 106 participants (98.11%) continued the full intervention, with a 100% reach to those enrolled in the trial. Participants showed high adherence to study activities (mean ± SD: 88.07 ± 9.33 documented days on diaries; 77.97 ± 18.87 fasting blood glucose measurements). Intervention reach was 100%. Participants described the intervention as informative, easy to follow, and helpful in avoiding hypoglycaemia and the side-effects of antidiabetic medications. Key facilitators included trust in pharmacists, altruism, and social support. Reported barriers were people's health status, age-related conditions, and stress.

Conclusions: This process evaluation highlights the SUGAR Handshake's potential for broader implementation and scale-up. By addressing identified barriers, future educational interventions may enhance adherence, improve patient outcomes, and advance hypoglycaemia management in diabetes care.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04081766), registration date 4,920,219.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信