Current Diabetes Reports

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 130–136 | Cite as

Interactive behavioral technologies and diabetes self-management support: Recent research findings from clinical trials

  • Garry WelchEmail author
  • Rebecca Shayne


A review of recent interactive behavioral technology (IBT) interventions applied to diabetes self-management identified 12 clinical trials, the majority being randomized controlled trials. Encouragingly, the studies used a wide range of technologies, were typically based in primary care settings, and mostly recruited disadvantaged or under-represented patients or those with little computer experience. However, only one third of the studies had incorporated behavioral theories or models into the interventions. Control conditions typically received some dose of the intervention or its components. Blood glucose control (A1c) was not significantly improved in 60% of studies, and where the intervention group was significantly improved over the control condition only modest improvements were found (−0.18% to 0.4%). Patientreported outcomes were encouraging, but weak attention to psychometrics (eg, responsiveness) was evident. Health care utilization was reduced for several uncontrolled studies. Future research should target patient motivation to participate more intensely and consistently and integrate IBT interventions into routine medical care.


Health Care Utilization Diabetes Education Chronic Care Model Computerize Provider Order Entry Routine Medical Care 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion: National Diabetes Fact Sheet. http://www. Accessed December 12, 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gonder-Frederick LA, Cox DJ, Ritterban LM: Diabetes and behavioral medicine: the second decade. J Consult Clin Psych 2002, 70:611–624. This review provides a comprehensive discussion of behavioral issues in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beaser RS, ed: Joslin's Diabetes Deskbook. Boston, MA: Joslin Diabetes Center; 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weinger K, Welch GW, Jacobson AM: Psychosocial and psychiatric issues in diabetes mellitus. In Principles of Diabetes Mellitus. Edited by Poretsky L. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2003:639–654.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Welch GW, Weinger K, Jacobson AM: Psychosocial aspects of type 2 diabetes. In Textbook of Type 2 Diabetes. Edited by Goldstein B, Muller-Wieland D. London: Martin Dunitz Publishers; 2003:65–76.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pew Internet and American Life Project 2005. Pew Foundation. Washington, DC. Scholar
  7. 7.
    US Census Bureau: Computer and Internet Use in the United States: 2003. October 2005. US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Washington, DC. Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Telecommunications and Information Administration: A Nation Online: Entering the Broadband Age. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration; 2002. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen W, Wellman B: Charting and Bridging Digital Divides: Comparing Socio-economic, Gender, Life Stage, and Rural-Urban Internet Access Use in Eight Countries. Sunnyvale, CA: AMD Global Consumer Advisory Board; 2003. http://www. FINAL_REPORT_CHARTING_DIGI_DIVIDES.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robinson JP: Digital divides: past, present, and future. IT and Society 2003, 1(:i-xiv. http://www.stanford. edu/group/siqss/itandsociety/v01i05.html. Accessed December 12, 2005.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Glasgow RE, Bull SS: Making a difference with interactive technology: considerations in using and evaluating computerized aids for diabetes self-management education. Diabetes Spectrum 2001, 14:99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Welch GW, Guthrie DW: Supporting lifestyle change with a computerized psychosocial assessment tool. Diabetes Spectrum 2002, 15:203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Welch G, Rose G, Ernst D: Motivational interviewing and diabetes: What is it, how do you do it, and does it work? Diabetes Spectrum 2006, in press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Piette JD, Weinberger M, Kraemer FB, et al.: Impact of automated calls with nurse follow-up on diabetes treatment outcomes in a department of Veterans Affairs health care system. Diabetes Care 2001, 24:202–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chumbler NR, Neugaard B, Ryan P, et al.: An observational study of veterans with diabetes receiving weekly or daily home telehealth monitoring. J Telemed Telecare 2005, 11:150–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chumbler NR, Neugaard B, Kobb R, et al.: Evaluation of a care co-ordination/home-telehealth program for veterans with diabetes: health services utilization and health-related quality of life. Eval Health Prof 2005, 28:464–478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Izquierdo RE, Knudson PE, Meyer S, et al.: A comparison of diabetes education administered through telemedicine versus in person. Diabetes Care 2003, 26:1002–1007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shea S, Weinstock RS, Starren J, et al.: A randomized trial comparing telemedicine case management with usual care in older, ethnically diverse, medically underserved patients with diabetes mellitus. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006, 13:40–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cherry JC, Moffat TP, Rodriguez C, Dryden K: Diabetes disease management for an indigent population empowered by telephone technology. Diabetes Technol Ther 2002, 4:783–791.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Smith KE, Levine BA, Clement SC, et al.: Impact of MyCareTeam for poorly controlled diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther 2004, 6:828–835.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gerber BS, Brodsky IG, Lawless KA, et al.: Implementation and evaluation of low-literacy diabetes education computer multimedia application. Diabetes Care 2005, 28:1574–1580.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Glasgow RE, Nutting PA, King DK, et al.: Randomized effectiveness trial of a computer-assisted intervention to improve diabetes care. Diabetes Care 2005, 28:33–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Glasgow RE, Boles SM, McKay HG, et al.: The D-Net diabetes self-management program: long-term implementation, outcomes, and generalization results. Prev Med 2003, 36:410–419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Montori VM, Leung TW, Helgemoe PK, et al.: Telecare for patients with type 1 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control. Diabetes Care 2004, 27:1088–1094.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goldberg HI, Lessler DS, Mertens K, et al.: Self-management support in a web-based medical record: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Jt Comm J Qual Saf 2004, 30:629–635.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bandura A: Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 1977, 84:191–215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stott N, Rollnick S, Rees MR, Pill RM: Innovation in clinical method: diabetes care and negotiation skills. Fam Prac 1995, 12:413–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Driscoll MP, ed: Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH: Social learning theory and the Health Belief Model. Health Educ Q 1988, 15:175–183.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohen S, Underwood L, Gottlieb B, eds: Social Support Measurement and Intervention: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000:29–52.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Uchino BN, Cacioppo JR, Kiecolt-Glaser JK: The relationship between social support and physiological processes: a review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychol Bull 1996, 119:488–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K: Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the chronic care model, Part 2. JAMA 2002, 288:1909–1914. The chronic care model identifies the essential elements of a health care system that encourage high-quality chronic disease care. These elements are the community, the health system, self-management support, delivery system design, decision support, and clinical information systems.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Glasgow RE, McKay HG, Piette JD, Reynolds KD: The REAIM framework for evaluating interventions: what can it tell us about approaches to chronic illness management? Patient Educ Couns 2001, 44:119–127. RE-AIM is a practical approach to guide the planning, conduct, evaluation, and reporting of translational research. It helps determine the absolute number, proportion, and representativeness of individuals who are willing to participate in a given research initiative.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McMahon GT, Gomes HE, Hohne SH, et al.: Web-based care management in patients with poorly controlled diabetes. Diabetes Care 2005, 28:1624–1629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust: Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Behavioral Medicine ResearchBaystate Medical CenterSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations