Back to Search Start Over

COMPAR-EU Recommendations on Self-Management Interventions in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Authors :
Jessica Beltran
Claudia Valli
Melixa Medina-Aedo
Carlos Canelo-Aybar
Ena Niño de Guzmán
Yang Song
Carola Orrego
Marta Ballester
Rosa Suñol
Janneke Noordman
Monique Heijmans
Georgios Seitidis
Sofia Tsokani
Katerina-Maria Kontouli
Christos Christogiannis
Dimitris Mavridis
Gimon de Graaf
Oliver Groene
Maria G. Grammatikopoulou
Francisco Camalleres-Guillem
Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez
Helen McGloin
Kirsty Winkley
Beate Sigrid Mueller
Zuleika Saz-Parkinson
Rosa Corcoy
Pablo Alonso-Coello
Source :
Healthcare, Vol 12, Iss 4, p 483 (2024)
Publication Year :
2024
Publisher :
MDPI AG, 2024.

Abstract

Self-management interventions (SMIs) offer a promising approach to actively engage patients in the management of their chronic diseases. Within the scope of the COMPAR-EU project, our goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the utilisation and implementation of SMIs in the care of adult individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A multidisciplinary panel of experts, utilising a core outcome set (COS), identified critical outcomes and established effect thresholds for each outcome. The panel formulated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, a transparent and rigorous framework for developing and presenting the best available evidence for the formulation of recommendations. All recommendations are based on systematic reviews (SR) of the effects and of values and preferences, a contextual analysis, and a cost-effectiveness analysis. The COMPAR-EU panel is in favour of using SMIs rather than usual care (UC) alone (conditional, very low certainty of the evidence). Furthermore, the panel specifically is in favour of using ten selected SMIs, rather than UC alone (conditional, low certainty of the evidence), mostly encompassing education, self-monitoring, and behavioural techniques. The panel acknowledges that, for most SMIs, moderate resource requirements exist, and cost-effectiveness analyses do not distinctly favour either the SMI or UC. Additionally, it recognises that SMIs are likely to enhance equity, deeming them acceptable and feasible for implementation.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
22279032
Volume :
12
Issue :
4
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Healthcare
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.66f1e02c6cd64b3fbfdb173f31cdf59a
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12040483