Skip to main content
. 2023 May 31;2023(5):CD014513. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014513

Garg 2017.

Study characteristics
Methods Effect of follow‐up by a hospital diabetes care team on diabetes control at one year after discharge from the hospital
RCT (NA clusters and NA providers), conducted in 1) Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Hypertension, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 2) Nurse practitioner, endocrinologist. In United States of America.
2 arms: 1. Control (usual care) (control arm) and 2. Intervention (continued care) (intervention arm)
Participants Control arm N: 91
Intervention arm N: 93, NA, NA
Diabetes type: 2
Mean age: 64.02 ± 10.72
% Male: 60.39
Longest follow‐up: 12 months
Interventions Control arm: (usual care)
Intervention arm: (continued care)
1) Case management
2) Team change
3) Facilitated relay of clinical information
Outcomes Glycated haemoglobin
Systolic blood pressure
Diastolic blood pressure
Low‐density lipoprotein
Funding source This work was supported by Health Resources and Services Award (HRSA), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (UD7HP25059)
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not reported.
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias) Unclear risk Table 1 ‐ all P values > 0.05, "Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar", but they also say "Patients included in this study had variable geographical location, insurance coverage and primary care coverage".
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias) High risk Table 1. Baseline HbA1c P = 0.04.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) High risk 17% lost in intervention (16/93) group, 18% lost in control group. Reasons not provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias) Low risk Objective measure for HbA1c, BP, LDL.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Retrospectively registered protocol. Methods match outcomes.
Risk of contamination (other bias) Low risk Unlikely that control patients were contacted by the study team.
Other bias Low risk None.