Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025

Iterative Development of an Innovative Smartphone-Based Dietary Assessment Tool: Traqq
Published on: March 19, 2021
Interprofessional follow-up for people at risk of type 2 diabetes in primary healthcare - a randomized controlled
Marit Graue1, Jannicke Igland1,2, Bjørg Frøysland Oftedal3
1Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway.
Objective:
To examine the effects of an empowerment-based interprofessional lifestyle intervention program among people at risk of type 2 diabetes on knowledge, skills, and confidence in self-management, health, psychological well-being, and lifestyle characteristics, and to explore the participants' perceptions of participating in the intervention.
Design And Methods:
In line with the Medical Research Council complex interventions research methods framework, we conducted a randomized controlled trial with embedded qualitative interviews in primary healthcare clinics in Norway between 2019-2021. Of the patients at risk (The Finnish Diabetes Risk Score Calculator (FINDRISC) ≥15 or Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥30) 142 accepted the invitation, and 14 participants from the intervention group participated in individual interviews after the 12-month follow-up. Our primary outcome was the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13). Secondary outcomes were EQ-5D-5L, EQ-VAS, WHO-Overall health, WHO-Overall QOL, weight, height, waist circumference, and regularity of physical activity. We used thematic analysis to analyse the qualitative data.
Results:
There was no clinically relevant differences of neither the primary nor the secondary endpoints between intervention and control group. As to the qualitative data, we identified two distinct features: 'Meaningful perspectives on lifestyle changes' and 'Lifestyle change is not a linear process due to challenges faced along the way' putting ownership of their choices in life into picture.
Conclusion:
The negative results of the RCT stand in contrast to the findings given by the participants voices, perceiving the intervention as a key eye opener placing their health challenges in perspective. How to interpret these seemingly conflicting findings of participants being seen, heard, and understood, helping them to take more conscious ownership of their choices in life, and at the same time demonstrating no improvements in symptoms or measures, is a dilemma that needs further exploration. We should be careful to implement interventions that do not demonstrate any effects on the quantitative outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
Diabetes Mellitus: Type 2 and Gestational
Diabetes: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Complications
Preventive Healthcare Services
Traditional Level Of Health Care System
The preventive healthcare service includes tests for screening. Preventive health care services include identifying and reducing disease risk...
Carbohydrate Metabolism
Starch accounts for approximately 60% of the carbohydrates consumed by humans. Since amylase enzymes cannot function in the stomach's acidic environment, starch can only be digested in the mouth and small intestine. Simple sugars are found naturally in milk and fruits in...
Diabetes: Management and Pharmacotherapy
Insulin remains the cornerstone of treatment for most patients with type 1 and many...

