Structured self-management improved risk factors in people at high risk of kidney disease

Design

Randomised controlled trial, two arms, single-centre, 12-week intervention with follow-up to 24 weeks

Population

134 adults with type 2 diabetes at high risk of diabetic kidney disease, tertiary hospital in Shandong, China

Primary outcome

HbA1c, UACR, eGFR, systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, BMI and waist circumference

Effect

Improved HbA1c, eGFR, SBP and LDL-C versus usual care; no significant difference in UACR, BMI or waist (magnitudes not given in the abstract)

Researchers at one tertiary hospital in China randomised 134 adults with type 2 diabetes, identified as high risk of diabetic kidney disease by a validated prediction model, to a 12-week structured self-management programme or usual care. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 12 weeks and 24 weeks using intention-to-treat analysis.

Compared with usual care, the intervention group had better HbA1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate, systolic blood pressure and LDL cholesterol. There was no significant difference in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio, BMI or waist circumference. The abstract does not give effect sizes, so the size of the gains is not known from this source.

The design is small, single-centre and only 24 weeks long, so it says nothing about kidney failure or cardiovascular events. It does support the idea that risk-based selection can direct educational effort to people who benefit most.

• Use a risk tool or albuminuria and eGFR trends to pick who gets intensive self-management support
• Review HbA1c, blood pressure and LDL together at each visit in this group, not HbA1c alone
• Do not expect albuminuria to fall within 6 months from education alone
• Check the original paper for effect sizes before quoting numbers to patients

Why it matters

It shifts self-management from a generic offer to something aimed at people whose kidneys are most at risk.

Don't overread it

A 24-week, single-centre trial with surrogate outcomes cannot show that kidney failure or events are prevented.

The statistics, in plain English

The trial reports that differences in four measures were statistically significant and that results held after multiple imputation for missing data. Statistical significance does not tell you the improvement is big enough to change outcomes, and the abstract does not give the sizes. About 7% to 12% of participants were lost to follow-up at the two time points.

Read the rest in the app

You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.

Get Daily Doctor — free

Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.