Cheng 2021.
| Study characteristics | |
| Methods |
Study design: RCT Duration of study: the study was conducted from April 2014 to October 2015. Country: China Income classification: upper‐middle income country in 2014‐2015 Geographical scope: Xi'an Healthcare setting: two tertiary teaching hospitals |
| Participants | 1. Age: mean age of participants was 55.0 years (range from 18 to 89 years). 2. Gender: both 3. Socioeconomic background: 58.68% less than 3000 RMB monthly income for the intervention group and 67.77% for the control group 4. Educational background: 43.80% had secondary/high school diplomas for the intervention group and 28.10% for the control group. Inclusion criteria: adult patients with type 2 diabetes with Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) over 58 mmol/mol [poorly controlled type 2 diabetes], accessible by telephone at home, and cognitively intact (indicated by Abbreviated Mental Test score of 6 or above). Exclusion criteria: patients with severe medical conditions, hearing or vision impairment, and psychiatric problems. Note: at baseline, the intervention and control group scores for the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) were, respectively, 2.67 (0.81) and 2.87 (0.84). Stated purpose: to evaluate the effectiveness of an empowerment‐based intervention on empowerment level, psychological distress, and quality of life amongst patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes |
| Interventions |
Name: empowerment‐based intervention group (Empowerment Process Model) Title/name of PW and number: 5 trained nurses 1. Selection: for educational background 2. Educational background: registered nurses with bachelor degree who had a track record in evidence‐based practice and with over 5 years’ experience in diabetes education 3. Training: 2‐day workshop delivered by nurse specialists with expertise in diabetes care and a researcher with expertise in empowerment philosophy 4. Supervision: clinical supervision was maintained throughout the intervention period by trainers and investigators. 5. Incentives/remuneration: not specified Prevention type: indicated – participants presented some level of distress as indicated by DDS scores. Intervention details: Empowerment Process Model: setting personally meaningful motivated goals and then inspired through action‐reflection dynamics. Patients were enabled to synthesize personal resources, including self‐management knowledge, skills, and self‐efficacy. Control: usual care (attentional control: twice‐weekly general health education classes delivered by ward nurses; also received postdischarge biweekly telephone social calls within 1 month after hospital to compensate for potential Hawthorne effects due to professional attention and contacts) |
| Outcomes |
Participants’outcomes of interest for this review
Carers’ outcomes of interest for this review Nil Economic outcomes Nil Time points: baseline, post‐intervention (< 1 month; 1‐6 months) |
| Notes |
Source of funding: Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme Notes on validation of instruments (screening and outcomes): the Chinese version of the DDS has demonstrated adequate reliability and validity. In this study, the subscales of the DDS demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency. Additional information: none Handling the data: not applicable Prospective trial registration number: ChiCTR‐IPR‐14005492 |