Improving type 2 diabetes mellitus glycaemic control through lifestyle modification implementing diet intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Type 2 diabetes mellitus represents a significant health problem. Many studies have reported that intensive nutritional intervention by itself or in addition to medications is the best method to improve glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, in clinical practice, dietary education is not implemented as an integral part in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to analyse the scientific evidence concerning the role of nutritional intervention in the glycaemic control of type 2 diabetes mellitus.
We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases from inception till May 2019 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that include dietary interventions in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
A total of 28 studies were included. Our results demonstrated that lifestyle interventions significantly lowered glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels compared to the usual care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, overall weighted mean difference, WMD = − 0.51 (− 0.67, − 0.35). Strategies combining individualized and group-based activities were the most effective, WMD = − 0.95 (− 1.24, − 0.66). Most of stratified analyses did not totally resolve heterogeneity, but improvement in HbA1c levels has been consistently observed.
The available evidence from RCTs shows that lifestyle intervention is more effective than the standard care regarding the glycaemic control of type 2 diabetic patients, particularly when there is a weight loss. It is time to translate this evidence to the primary health care practice. The protocol of the present systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, registration number CRD42018090469.
KeywordsDiet Glycaemic control Lifestyle intervention Meta-analysis Systematic review Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Body mass index
Randomised clinical trials
Weighted mean difference
The first author would like to acknowledge support by the CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP/CB06/02/1014). The authors especially thank the co-authors for their collaboration and effort in this systematic review and meta-analysis.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP/CB06/02/1014).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.
- 3.Preis SR, Hwang S-J, Coady S, Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, Savage PJ et al (2009) Trends in all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality among women and men with and without diabetes mellitus in the Framingham Heart Study, 1950–2005. Circulation 119(13):1728–1735PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.International Diabetes Federation (2017) IDF Atlas 8th edition. International Diabetes Federation, Brussels. http://www.diabetesatlas.org. Accessed 26 Nov 2019
- 17.Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K (2008) Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice, 4th edn. Wiley, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
- 22.Orozco-Beltrán D, Gil-Guillen VF, Quirce F, Navarro-Perez J, Pineda M, Gomez-De-La-Cámara A et al (2007) Control of diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care. The gap between guidelines and reality in Spain. Int J Clin Pract 61(6):909–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Grillo Mde F, Neumann CR, Scain SF, Rozeno RF, Beloli L, Perinetto T et al (2016) Diabetes education in primary care: a randomized clinical trial. Cad Saude Publica 32(5):e00097115Google Scholar
- 34.Spencer MS, Rosland AM, Kieffer EC, Sinco BR, Valerio M, Palmisano G et al (2011) Effectiveness of a community health worker intervention among African American and Latino adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Public Health 101(12):2253–2260PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Debussche X, Rollot O, Le Pommelet C, Fianu A, Le Moullec N, Regnier C et al (2012) Quarterly individual outpatients lifestyle counseling after initial inpatients education on type 2 diabetes: the REDIA Prev-2 randomized controlled trial in Reunion Island. Diabetes Metab 38(1):46–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Alonso-Domínguez R, García-Ortiz L, Patino-Alonso MC, Sánchez-Aguadero N, Gómez-Marcos MA, Recio-Rodríguez JI (2019) Effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention in increasing adherence to the mediterranean diet among patients with diabetes mellitus type 2: a controlled and randomized study (EMID study). Nutrients 11(1):162PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 54.Coppell KJ, Kataoka M, Williams SM, Chisholm AW, Vorgers SM, Mann JI (2010) Nutritional intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes who are hyperglycaemic despite optimised drug treatment-lifestyle over and above drugs in diabetes (LOADD) study: randomised controlled trial. Br Med J 341:c3337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 61.Higgins JPT, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 65.Franz MJ, MacLeod J, Evert A, Brown C, Gradwell E, Handu D et al (2017) Academy of nutrition and dietetics nutrition practice guideline for type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults: systematic review of evidence for medical nutrition therapy effectiveness and recommendations for integration into the nutrition care process. J Acad Nutr Diet 117(10):1659–1679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 69.Barnard N (2019) Ignorance of nutrition is no longer defensible. JAMA Intern Med 5(5):7–8Google Scholar