Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Aug 19;19(1):183.
doi: 10.1186/s12916-021-02053-x.

Effects of the Norfolk diabetes prevention lifestyle intervention (NDPS) on glycaemic control in screen-detected type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial

Michael Sampson  1   2 , Allan Clark  3 , Max Bachmann  3 , Nikki Garner  4 , Lisa Irvine  3 , Amanda Howe  3 , Colin Greaves  5 , Sara Auckland  4 , Jane Smith  6 , Jeremy Turner  4 , Dave Rea  4 , Gerry Rayman  7 , Ketan Dhatariya  4 , W Garry John  3   8 , Garry Barton  3 , Rebecca Usher  4 , Clare Ferns  4 , Melanie Pascale  4 ; NDPS group
Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of the Norfolk diabetes prevention lifestyle intervention (NDPS) on glycaemic control in screen-detected type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial

Michael Sampson et al. BMC Med. .

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this trial was to test if the Norfolk Diabetes Prevention Study (NDPS) lifestyle intervention, recently shown to reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes in high-risk groups, also improved glycaemic control in people with newly diagnosed screen-detected type 2 diabetes.

Methods: We screened 12,778 participants at high risk of type 2 diabetes using a fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). People with screen-detected type 2 diabetes were randomised in a parallel, three-arm, controlled trial with up to 46 months of follow-up, with a control arm (CON), a group-based lifestyle intervention of 6 core and up to 15 maintenance sessions (INT), or the same intervention with additional support from volunteers with type 2 diabetes trained to co-deliver the lifestyle intervention (INT-DPM). The pre-specified primary end point was mean HbA1c compared between groups at 12 months.

Results: We randomised 432 participants (CON 149; INT 142; INT-DPM 141) with a mean (SD) age of 63.5 (10.0) years, body mass index (BMI) of 32.4 (6.4) kg/m2, and HbA1c of 52.5 (10.2) mmol/mol. The primary outcome of mean HbA1c at 12 months (CON 48.5 (9.1) mmol/mol, INT 46.5 (8.1) mmol/mol, and INT-DPM 45.6 (6.0) mmol/mol) was significantly lower in the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (adjusted difference -2.57 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.5, -0.6; p = 0.007) but not significantly different between the INT-DPM and INT arms (-0.55 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.46, 1.35; p = 0.57), or INT vs CON arms (-2.14 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.33, 0.05; p = 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed the intervention had greater effect in participants < 65 years old (difference in mean HbA1c compared to CON -4.76 mmol/mol; 95% CI -7.75, -1.78 mmol/mol) than in older participants (-0.46 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.67, 1.75; interaction p = 0.02). This effect was most significant in the INT-DPM arm (-6.01 mmol/mol; 95% CI -9.56, -2.46 age < 65 years old and -0.22 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.7, 2.25; aged > 65 years old; p = 0.007). The use of oral hypoglycaemic medication was associated with a significantly lower mean HbA1c but only within the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (-7.0 mmol/mol; 95% CI -11.5, -2.5; p = 0.003).

Conclusion: The NDPS lifestyle intervention significantly improved glycaemic control after 12 months in people with screen-detected type 2 diabetes when supported by trained peer mentors with type 2 diabetes, particularly those receiving oral hypoglycaemics and those under 65 years old. The effect size was modest, however, and not sustained at 24 months.

Trial registration: ISRCTN34805606 . Retrospectively registered 14.4.16.

Keywords: Diabetes Prevention Mentors; Glycaemic control; Lifestyle Intervention; Peer support; Screen detected; Type 2 diabetes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram: participant flow through trial arms
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Saeedi P, Petersohn I, Salpea P, Malanda B, Karuranga S, Unwin N, et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diab Res Clin Pract. 2019;157:107843. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2019.107843. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Comment Reducing global diabetes burden by implementing solutions and identifying gaps: a Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2016;387:1494–1495. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30165-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Whicher CA, O’Neill S, Holt RIG. Diabetes in the UK: 2019. Diabet Med. 2020;37:242–247. doi: 10.1111/dme.14225. - DOI - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Public health draft guidance. Preventing type 2 diabetes: risk identification and interventions for individuals at high risk. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London; Available from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph38. 2012. Last accessed 12.2.21
    1. Hemmingsen B, Gimenez-Perez G, Mauricio D, Roqué I Figuls M, Metzendorf MI, Richter B. Diet, physical activity, or both for prevention of delay of type 2 diabetes and its associate complications in people at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017; Issue 12 Art No. CD003054 www.cochranelibrary.com (last accessed 4.8.20) - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data