Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Aims: To determine the effects of the Diabetes Manual on glycaemic control, diabetes-related distress and confidence to self-care of patients with Type 2 diabetes. Methods: A cluster randomized, controlled trial of an intervention group vs. a 6-month delayed-intervention control group with a nested qualitative study. Participants were 48 urban general practices in the West Midlands, UK, with high population deprivation levels and 245 adults with Type 2 diabetes with a mean age of 62 years recruited pre-randomization. The Diabetes Manual is 1:1 structured education designed for delivery by practice nurses. Measured outcomes were HbA1c, cardiovascular risk factors, diabetes-related distress measured by the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale and confidence to self-care measured by the Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy Scale. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 26 weeks. Results: There was no significant difference in HbA1c between the intervention group and the control group [difference -0.08%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28, 0.11]. Diabetes-related distress scores were lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (difference -4.5, 95% CI -8.1, -1.0). Confidence to self-care Scores were 11.2 points higher (95% CI 4.4, 18.0) in the intervention group compared with the control group. The patient response rate was 18.5%. Conclusions: In this population, the Diabetes Manual achieved a small improvement in patient diabetes-related distress and confidence to self-care over 26 weeks, without a change in glycaemic control. Further study is needed to optimize the intervention and characterize those for whom it is more clinically and psychologically effective to support its use in primary care. © 2008 The Authors.

Original publication




Journal article


Diabetic Medicine

Publication Date





722 - 731