Health-related quality of life and self-related 1 health in patients 2 with type 2 diabetes: Effects of group-based rehabilitation - versus individual counseling.

Eva Soelberg Vadstrup; Anne Frølich; Hans Jørgen Duckert Perrild; Eva Borg; Michael Einar Røder

doi:10.1186/1477-7525-9-110

Health-related quality of life and self-related 1 health in patients 2 with type 2 diabetes: Effects of group-based rehabilitation - versus individual counseling.

Eva Soelberg Vadstrup, Anne Frølich, Hans Jørgen Duckert Perrild, Eva Borg, Michael Einar Røder

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Type 2 diabetes can seriously affect patients' health-related quality of life and their self-rated health. Most often, evaluation of diabetes interventions assess effects on glycemic control with little consideration of quality of life. The aim of the current study was to study the effectiveness of group-based rehabilitation versus individual counselling on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and self-rated health in type 2 diabetes patients.Methods: We randomised 143 type 2 diabetes patients to either a six-month multidisciplinary group-based rehabilitation programme including patient education, supervised exercise and a cooking-course or a six-month individual counselling programme. HRQOL was measured by Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36) and self-rated health was measured by Diabetes Symptom Checklist - Revised (DCS-R).Results: In both groups, the lowest estimated mean scores of the SF36 questionnaire at baseline were "vitality" and "general health". There were no significant differences in the change of any item between the two groups after the six-month intervention period. However, vitality-score increased 5.2 points (p = 0.12) within the rehabilitation group and 5.6 points (p = 0.03) points among individual counselling participants.In both groups, the highest estimated mean scores of the DSC-R questionnaire at baseline were "Fatigue" and "Hyperglycaemia". Hyperglycaemic and hypoglycaemic distress decreased significantly after individual counselling than after group-based rehabilitation (difference -0.3 points, p = 0.04). No between-group differences occurred for any other items. However, fatigue distress decreased 0.40 points within the rehabilitation group (p = 0.01) and 0.34 points within the individual counselling group (p < 0.01). In the rehabilitation group cardiovascular distress decreased 0.25 points (p = 0.01).Conclusions: A group-based rehabilitation programme did not improve health-related quality of life and self-rated health more than an individual counselling programme. In fact, the individual group experienced a significant relief in hyper- and hypoglycaemic distress compared with the rehabilitation group.However, the positive findings of several items in both groups indicate that lifestyle intervention is an important part of the management of type 2 diabetes patients.

Original language	English
Journal	Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Volume	9
Pages (from-to)	110
ISSN	1477-7525
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-110
Publication status	Published - 7 Dec 2011

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1186/1477-7525-9-110

Cite this

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

@article{95f1f67a7a484bc196b0f413182cf27b,

title = "Health-related quality of life and self-related 1 health in patients 2 with type 2 diabetes: Effects of group-based rehabilitation - versus individual counseling.",

abstract = "Background: Type 2 diabetes can seriously affect patients' health-related quality of life and their self-rated health. Most often, evaluation of diabetes interventions assess effects on glycemic control with little consideration of quality of life. The aim of the current study was to study the effectiveness of group-based rehabilitation versus individual counselling on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and self-rated health in type 2 diabetes patients.Methods: We randomised 143 type 2 diabetes patients to either a six-month multidisciplinary group-based rehabilitation programme including patient education, supervised exercise and a cooking-course or a six-month individual counselling programme. HRQOL was measured by Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36) and self-rated health was measured by Diabetes Symptom Checklist - Revised (DCS-R).Results: In both groups, the lowest estimated mean scores of the SF36 questionnaire at baseline were {"}vitality{"} and {"}general health{"}. There were no significant differences in the change of any item between the two groups after the six-month intervention period. However, vitality-score increased 5.2 points (p = 0.12) within the rehabilitation group and 5.6 points (p = 0.03) points among individual counselling participants.In both groups, the highest estimated mean scores of the DSC-R questionnaire at baseline were {"}Fatigue{"} and {"}Hyperglycaemia{"}. Hyperglycaemic and hypoglycaemic distress decreased significantly after individual counselling than after group-based rehabilitation (difference -0.3 points, p = 0.04). No between-group differences occurred for any other items. However, fatigue distress decreased 0.40 points within the rehabilitation group (p = 0.01) and 0.34 points within the individual counselling group (p < 0.01). In the rehabilitation group cardiovascular distress decreased 0.25 points (p = 0.01).Conclusions: A group-based rehabilitation programme did not improve health-related quality of life and self-rated health more than an individual counselling programme. In fact, the individual group experienced a significant relief in hyper- and hypoglycaemic distress compared with the rehabilitation group.However, the positive findings of several items in both groups indicate that lifestyle intervention is an important part of the management of type 2 diabetes patients.",

author = "Vadstrup, {Eva Soelberg} and Anne Fr{\o}lich and Perrild, {Hans J{\o}rgen Duckert} and Eva Borg and R{\o}der, {Michael Einar}",

year = "2011",

month = dec,

day = "7",

doi = "10.1186/1477-7525-9-110",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

pages = "110",

journal = "Health and Quality of Life Outcomes",

issn = "1477-7525",

publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Health-related quality of life and self-related 1 health in patients 2 with type 2 diabetes: Effects of group-based rehabilitation - versus individual counseling.

AU - Vadstrup, Eva Soelberg

AU - Frølich, Anne

AU - Perrild, Hans Jørgen Duckert

AU - Borg, Eva

AU - Røder, Michael Einar

PY - 2011/12/7

Y1 - 2011/12/7

N2 - Background: Type 2 diabetes can seriously affect patients' health-related quality of life and their self-rated health. Most often, evaluation of diabetes interventions assess effects on glycemic control with little consideration of quality of life. The aim of the current study was to study the effectiveness of group-based rehabilitation versus individual counselling on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and self-rated health in type 2 diabetes patients.Methods: We randomised 143 type 2 diabetes patients to either a six-month multidisciplinary group-based rehabilitation programme including patient education, supervised exercise and a cooking-course or a six-month individual counselling programme. HRQOL was measured by Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36) and self-rated health was measured by Diabetes Symptom Checklist - Revised (DCS-R).Results: In both groups, the lowest estimated mean scores of the SF36 questionnaire at baseline were "vitality" and "general health". There were no significant differences in the change of any item between the two groups after the six-month intervention period. However, vitality-score increased 5.2 points (p = 0.12) within the rehabilitation group and 5.6 points (p = 0.03) points among individual counselling participants.In both groups, the highest estimated mean scores of the DSC-R questionnaire at baseline were "Fatigue" and "Hyperglycaemia". Hyperglycaemic and hypoglycaemic distress decreased significantly after individual counselling than after group-based rehabilitation (difference -0.3 points, p = 0.04). No between-group differences occurred for any other items. However, fatigue distress decreased 0.40 points within the rehabilitation group (p = 0.01) and 0.34 points within the individual counselling group (p < 0.01). In the rehabilitation group cardiovascular distress decreased 0.25 points (p = 0.01).Conclusions: A group-based rehabilitation programme did not improve health-related quality of life and self-rated health more than an individual counselling programme. In fact, the individual group experienced a significant relief in hyper- and hypoglycaemic distress compared with the rehabilitation group.However, the positive findings of several items in both groups indicate that lifestyle intervention is an important part of the management of type 2 diabetes patients.

AB - Background: Type 2 diabetes can seriously affect patients' health-related quality of life and their self-rated health. Most often, evaluation of diabetes interventions assess effects on glycemic control with little consideration of quality of life. The aim of the current study was to study the effectiveness of group-based rehabilitation versus individual counselling on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and self-rated health in type 2 diabetes patients.Methods: We randomised 143 type 2 diabetes patients to either a six-month multidisciplinary group-based rehabilitation programme including patient education, supervised exercise and a cooking-course or a six-month individual counselling programme. HRQOL was measured by Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36) and self-rated health was measured by Diabetes Symptom Checklist - Revised (DCS-R).Results: In both groups, the lowest estimated mean scores of the SF36 questionnaire at baseline were "vitality" and "general health". There were no significant differences in the change of any item between the two groups after the six-month intervention period. However, vitality-score increased 5.2 points (p = 0.12) within the rehabilitation group and 5.6 points (p = 0.03) points among individual counselling participants.In both groups, the highest estimated mean scores of the DSC-R questionnaire at baseline were "Fatigue" and "Hyperglycaemia". Hyperglycaemic and hypoglycaemic distress decreased significantly after individual counselling than after group-based rehabilitation (difference -0.3 points, p = 0.04). No between-group differences occurred for any other items. However, fatigue distress decreased 0.40 points within the rehabilitation group (p = 0.01) and 0.34 points within the individual counselling group (p < 0.01). In the rehabilitation group cardiovascular distress decreased 0.25 points (p = 0.01).Conclusions: A group-based rehabilitation programme did not improve health-related quality of life and self-rated health more than an individual counselling programme. In fact, the individual group experienced a significant relief in hyper- and hypoglycaemic distress compared with the rehabilitation group.However, the positive findings of several items in both groups indicate that lifestyle intervention is an important part of the management of type 2 diabetes patients.

U2 - 10.1186/1477-7525-9-110

DO - 10.1186/1477-7525-9-110

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 22152107

SN - 1477-7525

VL - 9

SP - 110

JO - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

JF - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ER -

Health-related quality of life and self-related 1 health in patients 2 with type 2 diabetes: Effects of group-based rehabilitation - versus individual counseling.

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this