Table 4: Spousal interventional studies among people with diabetes.

Study and year	Sample size	Domains/parameters	Interventions, scales or tools	Results	Conclusion
Trief et al., 201668	280 couples	Glycaemic control and secondary outcomes: BMI, waist circumference, blood pressure, depressive symptoms, diabetes self-efficacy, and diabetes distress	Four-month intervention among three arms: CC n=104, IC n=94; DE n=82	Significant HbA1C reductions for all (12 months: CC -0.47%, IC -0.52%, DE -0.57%) For BMI, the CC arm showed significant improvement (4 months -0.354, p=0.009; 8 months -0.393, p=0.027; 12 months -0.474, p=0.021) with significant WC reductions at all follow ups (p<0.001) The IC arm showed greater blood pressure improvement while results for secondary psychosocial outcomes favoured the CC arm	A collaborative couples intervention resulted in significant, lasting improvements in HbA1C levels, obesity measures, and some psychosocial outcomes
Trief et al., 201169	Couples (n=44), in which one partner had T2DM	Telephone goal-setting, dietary behaviour change, and a focus on emotions	Couple intervention, individual intervention, individual DE	Mixed-model regression analyses found statistically significant treatment effects for total cholesterol	DE resulted in improved blood glucose control
Gilden et al., 198970	Older male patients (aged 65–82 years) and their partners	Scored questionnaires	Six-week DE programme	Increased knowledge of diabetes (p<0.05); reduction in stress correlated with increased knowledge (r=0.9; p<0.05) and improved diet-related QoL (r=0.7; p<0.02) Decreased stress, enhanced QoL (p<0.01), greater improvement in knowledge (p<0.02), increase in family involvement (p<0.05) Improvement in metabolic control of diabetes (p<0.001)	DE intervention is effective for both patients and their partners

BMI = body mass index; CC = couples call; DE = diabetes education; HbA1C = glycated haemoglobin; IC = individual calls; QoL = quality of life; T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus; WC = waist circumference