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