AIMS: The main aim was to systematically evaluate the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of structured patient education on their knowledge, participation, wound healing, and quality of life.
METHODS: The search strategy retrieved studies published between 2009 and 2021 in English across PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library. Adult participants aged 18 years and above were included. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and interventional studies were all included in this review. Three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of the studies, prior to critical appraisal, using standardized tools, that is, the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for randomized and non-randomized studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted.
RESULTS: A total of eight studies (466 participants) were included in this review. Available evidence indicated improved patient knowledge, participation, and quality of life with structured patient education. However, there was insufficient high-quality evidence to conclude the effect on wound healing.
LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Structured patient education for PI was deemed to help improve patients' knowledge, participation, and quality of life. More rigorous trials are needed for the effect on wound healing progress. Thus, future educational interventions should include wound care components that describe the patient's role in promoting wound healing. A well-structured patient education program protocol is crucial to ensure the educational intervention was measurable in its effectiveness and reproducibility.
DESIGN: Two-centre, randomised, controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis.
PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two adults who had undergone cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy were included.
INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly allocated to one of two groups at 4 (SD 1) days after surgery. The control group received the usual advice to restrict their upper limb use for 4 to 6 weeks (ie, restrictive sternal precautions). The experimental group received advice to use pain and discomfort as the safe limits for their upper limb use during daily activities (ie, less restrictive precautions) for the same period. Both groups received postoperative individualised education in hospital and via weekly telephone calls for 6 weeks.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was physical function assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery. Secondary outcomes included upper limb function, pain, kinesophobia, and health-related quality of life. Outcomes were measured before hospital discharge and at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. Adherence to sternal precautions was recorded.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in physical function between the groups at 4 weeks (MD 1.0, 95% CI -0.2 to 2.3) and 12 weeks (MD 0.4, 95% CI -0.9 to 1.6) postoperatively. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Modified (ie, less restrictive) sternal precautions for people following cardiac surgery had similar effects on physical recovery, pain and health-related quality of life as usual restrictive sternal precautions. Similar outcomes can be anticipated regardless of whether people following cardiac surgery are managed with traditional or modified sternal precautions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN12615000968572. [Katijjahbe MA, Granger CL, Denehy L, Royse A, Royse C, Bates R, Logie S, Nur Ayub MA, Clarke S, El-Ansary D (2018) Standard restrictive sternal precautions and modified sternal precautions had similar effects in people after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy ('SMART' Trial): a randomised trial. Journal of Physiotherapy 64: 97-106].
Methodology: This sub-analysis included Filipino patients with T1DM or T2DM, aged 18 years and older, treated with insulin for more than 12 months, who completed the two-part self-assessment questionnaires (SAQ1 and SAQ2) and patient diaries that recorded hypoglycemia during retrospective (6 months/4 weeks before baseline) and prospective period (4 weeks after baseline) (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02306681).
Results: A total of 671 patients were enrolled and completed the SAQ1 (62 patients with T1DM and 609 patients with T2DM). Almost all patients (100% in T1DM and 99.3% in T2DM) experienced at least 1 hypoglycemic event prospectively. The incidence of any hypoglycemia was also high in the prospective period compared to retrospective period (72.6 [95% CI: 64.8, 80.9] events PPY and 43.6 [95% CI: 37.8, 49.9] events PPY; p=0.001, respectively) in T1DM patients.
Conclusion: Among insulin-treated patients, higher rates of hypoglycemia were reported prospectively than retrospectively. This indicates that the patients in real-life setting often under-report hypoglycemia. Patient education can help in accurate reporting and appropriate management of hypoglycemia and diabetes.
METHODS: The e-intervention group (n = 62) received a 6-month web-delivered intensive dietary intervention while the control group (n = 66) continued with their standard hospital care. Outcomes (DKAB and DSOC scores, FBG and HbA1c) were compared at baseline, post-intervention and follow-up.
RESULTS: While both study groups showed improvement in total DKAB score, the margin of improvement in mean DKAB score in e-intervention group was larger than the control group at post-intervention (11.1 ± 0.9 vs. 6.5 ± 9.4,p