IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cardiometabolic Risk Factor Changes Observed in Diabetes Prevention Programs in US Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Uma Mudaliar
  • Azadeh Zabetian
  • Michael Goodman
  • Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui
  • Ann L Albright
  • Edward W Gregg
  • Mohammed K Ali

Abstract

Background: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) study showed that weight loss in high-risk adults lowered diabetes incidence and cardiovascular disease risk. No prior analyses have aggregated weight and cardiometabolic risk factor changes observed in studies implementing DPP interventions in nonresearch settings in the United States. Methods and Findings: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we pooled data from studies in the United States implementing DPP lifestyle modification programs (focused on modest [5%–7%] weight loss through ≥150 min of moderate physical activity per week and restriction of fat intake) in clinical, community, and online settings. We reported aggregated pre- and post-intervention weight and cardiometabolic risk factor changes (fasting blood glucose [FBG], glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c], systolic or diastolic blood pressure [SBP/DBP], total [TC] or HDL-cholesterol). We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from January 1, 2003, to May 1, 2016. Two reviewers independently evaluated article eligibility and extracted data on study designs, populations enrolled, intervention program characteristics (duration, number of core and maintenance sessions), and outcomes. We used a random effects model to calculate summary estimates for each outcome and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). To examine sources of heterogeneity, results were stratified according to the presence of maintenance sessions, risk level of participants (prediabetes or other), and intervention delivery personnel (lay or professional). Conclusions: DPP lifestyle modification programs achieved clinically meaningful weight and cardiometabolic health improvements. Together, these data suggest that additional value is gained from these programs, reinforcing that they are likely very cost-effective. In a meta-analysis of observational and randomized studies, Uma Mudaliar and colleagues document the effects on weight and cardiovascular indicators of diet and behavior modification interventions based on the Diabetes Prevention Program.Background: Why Was This Study Done?: What Did the Researchers Do and Find?: What Do These Findings Mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Uma Mudaliar & Azadeh Zabetian & Michael Goodman & Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui & Ann L Albright & Edward W Gregg & Mohammed K Ali, 2016. "Cardiometabolic Risk Factor Changes Observed in Diabetes Prevention Programs in US Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002095
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002095
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002095&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002095?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Laxy & Ping Zhang & Boon Peng Ng & Hui Shao & Mohammed K. Ali & Ann Albright & Edward W. Gregg, 2020. "Implementing Lifestyle Change Interventions to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes in US Medicaid Programs: Cost Effectiveness, and Cost, Health, and Health Equity Impact," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 713-726, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.