Current evidence shows that type 2 diabetes can be effectively prevented and delayed by lifestyle modification. After careful development and pilot testing, a rigorous evaluation of such programmes is crucial to assess their effectiveness prior to large scale implementation. Integrating the patient perspective in this evaluation is essential. In principle, Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) questionnaires can address this key question. However, researchers and clinicians lack a clear framework to make a sound selection of appropriate measures among the large set of possible questionnaires. As a consequence, it is unclear what is the most useful information to be captured from patients when assessing a new programme, so that it can be determined whether the programme can be generalised to a larger population: is it health-related quality of life, satisfaction or something different which could predict the long-term success of the programme? We recommend a specific approach, better adapted to the nature of the intervention, and suggest a selection of a few existing PRO measures that could satisfy the requirements.
KnowlerWCBarrett-ConnorEFowlerSE. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med2002;346:393-403.
3.
PanXRLiGWHuYH. Effects of diet and exercise in preventing NIDDM in people with impaired glucose tolerance. The Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care1997;20:537-44.
4.
TuomilehtoJLindstromJErikssonJG. Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med2001;344:1343-50.
5.
AckermannRTMarreroDG. Adapting the Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle intervention for delivery in the community: the YMCA model. Diabetes Educ2007;33:69, 74-5, 77-8.
6.
SchwarzPESchwarzJSchuppeniesA. Development of a diabetes prevention management program for clinical practice. Public Health Rep2007;122:258-63.
7.
HernanWHBrandleMZhangP. Costs associated with the primary prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the diabetes prevention program. Diabetes Care2003;26:36-47.
8.
U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf (last accessed 21 March 2011).
9.
European Medicines Agency. Reflection Paper on the Regulatory Guidance for the Use of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Measures in the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Doc.Ref.EMEA/CHMP/EWP/139391/2004. www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ewp/13939104en.pdf (last accessed 29 July 2009).
10.
LohrKN. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res2002;11:193-205.
11.
TerweeCBBotSDde BoerMR. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol2007;60:34-42.
12.
ProchaskaJODiclementeCCNorcrossJC. In search of how people change. Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol1992;47:1102-14.
13.
LazarusRSFolkmanS. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer, 1984.
14.
BanduraA. The anatomy of stages of change. Am J Health Promot1997;12:8-10.
15.
DukeSAColagiuriSColagiuriR. Individual patient education for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2009:CD005268.
16.
EigenmannCAColagiuriRSkinnerTCTrevenaL. Are current psychometric tools suitable for measuring outcomes of diabetes education?Diabet Med2009;26:425-36.
17.
PolonskyWHAndersonBJLohrerPA. Assessment of diabetes-related distress. Diabetes Care1995;18:754-60.
18.
WelchGJacobsonAMPolonskyWH. The Problems Areas in Diabetes Scale. An evaluation of its clinical utility. Diabetes Care1997;20:760.
19.
WelchGWeingerKAndersonBJPolonskyWH. Responsiveness of the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID) questionnaire. Diabet Med2003;20:69-72.
20.
CareyMPJorgensenRSWeinstockRS. Reliability and validity of the Appraisal of Diabetes Scale. J Behav Med1991;14:43-50.
21.
DunnSMSmarttHHBeeneyLJTurtleJR. Measurement of emotional adjustment in diabetic patients: validity and reliability of ATT39. Diabetes Care1986;9:480-489.
22.
WelchGDunnSMBeeneyLJ. The ATT39: a measure of psychosocial adjustment to diabetes. In: BradleyC (ed). Handbook of Psychology and Diabetes. Amsterdam: Hardwood Academic Publishers, 1984; 223-44.
23.
FehnelSEBannCMHogueSL. The development and psychometric evaluation of the Motivation and Energy Inventory (MEI). Qual Life Res2004;13:1321-36.
24.
AndersonRMFitzgeraldJTFunnellMMGruppenLD. The third version of the Diabetes Attitude Scale. Diabetes Care1998;21:1403-7.
25.
AndersonRMFunnellMMFitzgeraldJTMarreroDG. The Diabetes Empowerment Scale: a measure of psychosocial self-efficacy. Diabetes Care2000;23:739-43.
26.
BijlJVPoelgeest-EeltinkAVShortridge-BaggettL. The psychometric properties of the diabetes management self-efficacy scale for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Adv Nurs1999;30:352-59.
27.
KaraMvan der BijlJJShortridge-BaggettL. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy Scale for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: scale development. Int J Nurs Stud2006;43:611-21.
28.
McDowellJCourtneyMEdwardsHShortridge-BaggettL. Validation of the Australian/English version of the Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy Scale. Int J Nurs Pract2005;11:177-84.
29.
Vivienne WuSFCourtneyMEdwardsH. Development and validation of the Chinese version of the Diabetes Management Self-efficacy Scale. Int J Nurs Stud2008;45:534-42.
30.
BastiaensHSunaertPWensJ. Supporting diabetes self-management in primary care: pilot-study of a group-based programme focusing on diet and exercise. Prim Care Diabetes2009;3:103-9.
31.
IzquierdoREKnudsonPEMeyerS. A comparison of diabetes education administered through telemedicine versus in person. Diabetes Care2003;26:1002-7.
32.
SturtJAWhitlockSFoxC. Effects of the Diabetes Manual 1:1 structured education in primary care. Diabet Med2008;25:722-31.
33.
GeorgeJTValdovinosAPRussellI. Clinical effectiveness of a brief educational intervention in Type 1 diabetes: results from the BITES (Brief Intervention in Type 1 diabetes, Education for Self-efficacy) trial. Diabet Med2008;25:1447-53.
34.
LoweJLinjawiSMenschM. Flexible eating and flexible insulin dosing in patients with diabetes: Results of an intensive self-management course. Diabetes Res Clin Pract2008;80:439-43.
35.
McCarrierKPRalstonJDHirschIB. Web-based collaborative care for type 1 diabetes: a pilot randomized trial. Diabetes Technol Ther2009;11:211-17.
