Multisystemic Therapy Compared to Telephone Support for Youth with Poorly Controlled Diabetes: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial
- 662 Downloads
Few interventions have effectively improved health outcomes among youth with diabetes in chronic poor metabolic control.
This study aims to determine whether multisystemic therapy (MST), an intensive, home-based, tailored family treatment, was superior to weekly telephone support for improving regimen adherence and metabolic control among adolescents with chronic poor metabolic control.
A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 146 adolescents with types 1 or 2 diabetes. Data were collected at baseline, 7 months (treatment termination), and 12 months (6 months follow-up).
Adolescents receiving MST had significantly improved metabolic control at 7 (1.01 % decrease) and 12 months (0.74 % decrease) compared to adolescents in telephone support. Parents of adolescents receiving MST reported significant improvements in adolescent adherence. However, adolescent-reported adherence was unchanged.
MST improved health outcomes among adolescents with chronic poor metabolic control when compared to telephone support. Home-based approaches may provide a viable means to improve access to behavioral interventions for such youth.
KeywordsAdherence Youth Diabetes Family treatment
- 23.Henggeler SW, Schoenwald SK, Borduin CM: Multisystemic therapy for antisocial behavior in children and adolescents (second edition). New York: The Guilford Press, 2009.Google Scholar
- 31.Frey MA, Denyes MJ. Health and illness self-care in adolescents with IDDM: A test of Orem's theory. Adv Nurs Sci. 1989; 12: 67–75.Google Scholar
- 34.White NH, Cleary PA, Dahms W, Goldstein D, Malone J, Tamborlane WV, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Research Group (2001) Beneficial effects of intensive therapy of diabetes during adolescence: Outcomes after the conclusion of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). J Pediatr 139: 804–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar