Search

Your search keyword '"Chiu, Hsiao‐Yean"' showing total 188 results
Start Over Author "Chiu, Hsiao‐Yean" Search Limiters Peer Reviewed
188 results on '"Chiu, Hsiao‐Yean"'

26. Comparative Effects of Diabetes Self‐Management Programs on Type 2 Diabetes Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis.

Author

Romadlon, Debby Syahru, Tu, Yu‐Kang, Chen, Yang‐Ching, Hasan, Faizul, Kurniawan, Rudy, and Chiu, Hsiao‐Yean

Subjects
TYPE 2 diabetes, DIASTOLIC blood pressure, GLYCEMIC control, MEDICAL personnel, SYSTOLIC blood pressure
Abstract

Aims: This systematic review and network meta‐analysis compared the effects of various diabetes self‐management programs: Diabetes Self‐Management Education (DSME), Diabetes Self‐Management Support (DSMS), and Diabetes Self‐Management Education and Support (DSMES). Methods: We searched four electronic databases for eligible articles up to March 1, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of DSME, DSMS, or DSMES on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level, fasting blood glucose (FBG), total cholesterol (TC), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in adults with type 2 diabetes were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was used to assess each study quality, and Confidence in Network Meta‐Analysis was applied to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Data were pooled with a random‐effects model under a frequentist framework. Results: A total of 108 studies encompassing 17,735 participants (mean age 57.4 years) were analysed. DSMES, compared with usual care, significantly reduced HbA1c level (mean difference = −0.61%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.74 to −0.49; certainty of evidence = moderate), FBG (−23.33 mg/dL; −31.33 to −15.34; high), TC (−5.62 mg/dL; −8.69 to −2.55; high), SBP (−3.05 mmHg; −5.20 to −0.91; high), and DBP (−2.15 mmHg; −3.36 to −0.95; high). Compared with DSME, DSMES showed significantly greater improvements in HbA1c levels (−0.23%; −0.40 to −0.07; high) and DBP (−1.82 mmHg; −3.47 to −0.17; high). DSMES was ranked as the top treatment for improving diabetes clinical outcomes (0.82–0.97) in people with type 2 diabetes. Conclusions: DSMES, in people with type 2 diabetes, yields the greatest improvement in the key clinical outcomes of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and blood pressure levels. Healthcare providers should incorporate the DSMES approach into their daily care routines. Approximately 30% of the studies reviewed raised some concerns about their quality, underscoring the need for high‐quality studies in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

33. Diagnostic Accuracy of the FRAIL Scale, Groningen Frailty Indicator, Tilburg Frailty Indicator, and PRISMA-7 for Frailty Screening Among Older Adults in Community Settings: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Author

Vo, Nhi Thi, Tu, Yu-Kang, Lin, Kuan-Chia, Chiu, Hsiao-Yean, and Huang, Hui-Chuan

Subjects
MEDICAL information storage & retrieval systems, INDEPENDENT living, RESEARCH funding, FRAIL elderly, RESEARCH methodology evaluation, GERIATRICS, QUESTIONNAIRES, META-analysis, SYSTEMATIC reviews, MEDLINE, GERIATRIC assessment, MEDICAL screening, ONLINE information services, PSYCHOSOCIAL factors, SENSITIVITY & specificity (Statistics), EVALUATION
Abstract

Background and Objectives This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of four questionnaire-based tools (i.e. the FRAIL scale, Groningen Frailty Indicator [GFI], Tilburg Frailty Indicator [TFI], and PRISMA-7) for screening frailty in older adults. Research Design and Methods The 4 databases comprising the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PubMed, and ProQuest were searched from inception to June 20, 2023. Study quality comprising risks of bias and applicability was assessed via a QUADAS-2 questionnaire. A bivariate network meta-analysis model and Youden's index were performed to identify the optimal tool and cutoff points. Results In total, 20 studies comprising 13 for FRAIL, 7 for GFI, 6 for TFI, and 5 for PRISMA-7 were included. Regarding study quality appraisal, all studies had high risks of bias for study quality assessment domains. Values of the pooled sensitivity of the FRAIL scale, GFI, TFI, and PRISMA-7 were 0.58, 0.74, 0.66, and 0.73, respectively. Values of the pooled specificity of the FRAIL scale, GFI, TFI, and PRISMA-7 were 0.92, 0.77, 0.84, and 0.86, respectively. The Youden's index was obtained for the FRAIL scale with a cutoff of 2 points (Youden's index = 0.65), indicating that the FRAIL scale with a cutoff of 2 points was the optimal tool for frailty screening in older adults. Discussion and Implications The FRAIL scale comprising 5 self-assessed items is a suitable tool for interview older adults for early frailty detection in community settings; it has the advantages of being short, simple, and easy to respond to. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results