Skip to main content

Table 6 Distribution of T2DM patients according to the outcome categories at 1-year follow-up

From: Effectiveness of the EMPOWER-PAR Intervention in Improving Clinical Outcomes of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Primary Care: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

Outcome Categories

Group

Deteriorating

Poor, no change

Good, no change

Improving

P value

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

Primary outcome

 HbA1c

Intervention

20 (4.2)

365 (77.4)

52 (11)

34 (7.3)

0.004

Control

31 (7.3)

333 (79.8)

40 (9.7)

13 (3.2)

 

Secondary outcome

 BP

Intervention

58 (12.2)

298 (63.4)

59 (12.6)

56 (11.8)

0.15

Control

61 (14.6)

268 (64.4)

47 (11.3)

41 (9.7)

 

 BMI

Intervention

18 (3.9)

380 (80.8)

56 (11.8)

17 (3.5)

0.37

Control

10 (2.5)

357 (85.6)

43 (10.2)

7 (1.7)

 

 WC

Intervention

16 (4.8)

286 (86.4)

17 (5.1)

12 (3.6)

0.72

Control

15 (4.5)

285 (85.8)

24 (7.2)

8 (2.4)

 

 TC

Intervention

48 (10.1)

284 (60.2)

78 (16.6)

61 (13)

0.93

Control

40 (9.6)

255 (61.2)

72 (17.2)

50 (12)

 

 TG

Intervention

65 (13.8)

185 (39.3)

149 (31.6)

72 (15.2)

0.32

Control

52 (12.5)

144 (34.6)

168 (40.2)

53 (12.6)

 

 LDL-c

Intervention

56 (12.4)

249 (54.8)

89 (19.5)

61 (13.3)

0.45

Control

50 (12.7)

228 (57.3)

74 (18.5)

46 (11.5)

 

 HDL-c

Intervention

44 (9.4)

134 (28.4)

243 (51.5)

50 (10.7)

0.11

Control

34 (8.1)

96 (23)

244 (58.6)

43 (10.4)

 
  1. Intention to treat analysis was performed for primary and secondary outcome measures
  2. Bold data represents statistically significant results i.e P value < 0.05