Skip to main content

Table 1 Description of included studies in the systematic review

From: Behavioural Change Techniques in Health Coaching-Based Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Study, Country, and Objectives

Sample (completed), Mean Age; Female %

Study Duration (M) (Intervention+ Follow-ups)

Delivery mode

Intervention providers

Measurements (n)

Results

Control group

Frosch et al. (2011), U S[34] To assess participants’ improvement in self-care behaviours, level of HbA1C, lipid and BP levels at 6 months

201 (201); 55.5; 48.5

6

TEL

Nurse educators

(3), A1c, lipid and blood pressure

Decline in HbA1c at 6 months in both groups (P < 001),

Educational brochure

Glasgow et al. (2006), U S[35] To assess the impact of a computer-assisted intervention on T2DM self-management

335 (299); 61.5; 50.2

2

FTF,TEL,ERPM/EA

Health educators

(7) FVSS, Daily fat intake, HbA1c, Cholesterol, PHQ, DDS, BMI

There was a decline in HbA1c favouring intervention group, but these differences did not reach significance

Computer-enhanced, Usual care

Kim et al., (2015), U S[36] To assess effectiveness of a community-based, culturally tailored, program in T2DM patients

250 (209); 58.7; 43

12

TEL, GER

Nurses and community health workers

(8) HbA1c, Triglyceride, Cholesterol, Blood pressure, diabetes-related quality of life, self-efficacy, adherence to diabetes management regimen, and health literacy

The difference between the two groups was statistically significant favouring the intervention group (reductions in HbA1c: 1 .0–1.3% compared to the control group with reductions of 0.5–0.7%)

Educational brochure

McKay et al. (2002), U S[37] To assess the impact of using an internet-based in improving diabetes self-management

160 (133); 59.3; 53.1

3

ERPM/EA

Health coach

(6) HbA1c, Fat intake, Poor dietary practices, Depression symptoms, Psychological well-being (SF-12), Total cholesterol

There was an improvement but not statistically significant difference favouring coaching group in relation to HbA1c

Information- only reading

Ruggiero et al. (2010), U S[38] To assess the effect of the intervention delivered by medical assistant coach on HbA1C compared with usual care group

50 (42); 65.8; 66

6

FTF,TEL

Medical assistants

HbA1c

HbA1C level decreased across the intervention group (MAC), but it was not significant between groups

Treatment as usual

Sacco et al. (2009), U S[39] To evaluate the effects of telephone-bases coaching provided by professionals on T2DM, including diabetes adherence and control, diabetes-related complications, and diabetes distress

62 (48); 52; 58

6

TEL

University students

(9) HbA1c, Diet, Exercise, Foot care, Depression, Self-efficacy, HTS, RSC, ASC

HbA1C decreased in the coaching group (M = 7.4%; SD = 1.12), but was not statistically significant

Usual Care

Thom et al. (2013), U S[40] To determine how clinic-based peer health coaching affects the management of uncontrolled T2DM in low-income populations

299 (236); 55.2; 52

6

FTF,TEL

Peers

(4) HbA1c, BMI, LDL, SBP

The difference was statistically significant between the two groups favouring the coaching group (HbA1C decreased by 1.07%) Whereas the reduction was 0.3% in the control group

Usual Care

Whittemore et al. (2004), U S[41] To assess the effect nurse-coaching intervention on T2DM

53 (49); 57.6; 100

6

FTF,TEL,ERPM/EA

Nurses

(5) HbA1C, BMI, Dietary, Exercise, Distress

A difference between the two groups was documented at 3 months in HbA1C levels favouring the coaching group, but the difference was not statistically significant

Usual Care

Willard-grace et al. (2015), U S[42] To assess impacts of health coaching in the control of T2DM, Hypertension, and Hyperlipidemia compared with usual care

144 (132); NA; NA

12

FTF, TEL

Medical assistants

(4) HbA1c, HDL, LDL, SBP

Intervention group was as twice as many patients in control arm achieved the HbA1c goal (48.6% vs 27.6%, P = .01). The difference was statistically significant

Usual Care

Wolever et al. (2010), U S[43] To evaluate the impact of integrative health coaching on various T2DM patient variables

56 (49); 53; 77

6

TEL

Psychologist and social worker

(10) HbA1c, ASK-20, MAS; PAM; ADS, BFS, ISEL-12, PSS-4, SF-12, Exercise

HbA1c was reduced in the intervention group significantly by 0.64% (from 8.9 1.78% at baseline to 8.3 1.76%; P = .030; Cohen d = .34).

Usual Care

Chen et al., (2016), Taiwan [44] To evaluate changes in HbA1c for group provided care by pharmacist compared usual care without a pharmacist

100 (100); 72.5;50

6

FTF,TEL

Certified diabetes educator Pharmacist

(1), Change in A1c level (6 months)

HbA1c level significantly decreased (0.83%) for the intervention group with an increase of 0.43% for the usual care arm (P ≤ 0.001).

Usual Care

Lin et al., (2021), Taiwa n[45] To explore the impact of health coaching on A1c and diet for patients with T2DM

114(114)45;49

6

FTF, TEL

Health Coach

(8) HbA1c, Daily calorie intake, Whole grains, Meats and protein, Milk and dairy products, Vegetables, Fruits, Fats and oils

Patients with type 2 diabetes who underwent a 6-month health coaching program saw a significant reduction in HbA1c by 0.62% (P < 0.01)

Usual care

Basak Cinar & Schou (2014), Turkey [46] To assess the difference in outcomes between health coaching group compared with usual health education for T2DM

186 (162a); NA; NA 100

16 M (10+  6)

FTF, TEL

Dental professional

(3), HbA1C, CAL and TBSES

Significant differences found for HbA1C in Health coaching group, (P < 0.05)

Health education

Sherifali et al., (2021), Canad a[47] To assess the impact of telephone health coaching on A1c for patients with T2DM

365(365) 57;50

12 M (6 + 6)

TEL

Registered nurse/certified diabetes educator

(2) HbA1c, ADDQoL-19

HbA1c was reduced in the intervention group significantly by 1.78% (P < 0.005)

Usual diabetes education

Cho et al. (2011), Kore a[48] To assess impact of health coaching on HbA1c improvement after 3 months

71 (64); 64.2; NA

3

FTF, ERPM

Physicians and nurses

(2), HbA1c, cholesterol

HbA1c level was significantly decreased for intervention group (reduced from 8.0 to 7.5%) P < 0.0. In control group HbA1c reduced from 8.0 to 7.8%, P = 0.11)

Diabetes education

Holmen et al. (2014), Norway [49] To assess effectiveness of using phone-based self-management system used by a diabetes specialist on HbA1c, diabetes self-management, and improvement in quality of life

151 (120); 57.0; 41

12 M(4+  8)

TEL,ERPM/EA

T2DM specialist nurse

(9) HbA1c, BMI, PAEL, HAD, STA CAASMI, HSN, SIS, EWB

All groups have a reduction in HbA1c level

Usual care

Karhula et al. (2015), Finlan d[50] To assess effectiveness of phone-based health coaching program, on improvement in HRQL and other clinical measures of T2DM and heart disease patients

250 (217); 66.3; 44.4

12

TET,ERMP/EA

Health coaches

(8), HbA1c, BP, BMI, Waist circumference, Triglycerides, Cholesterol, LDL, HDL

No statistically significant difference found in relation to HbA1c between the two groups

Usual care

Kempf et al. (2017), German y[51] To assess effectiveness of the Telemedical Lifestyle intervention Program (TeLiPro) on HbA1c

202(167/133);59.6;49

12 M(3 + 9)

TEL,ERPM/EA

Diabetes coaches

(6), HbA1c, BMI, CVD, QoL, eating behaviour, Antidiabetic medication

The difference between the two groups was statistically significant favouring the TeLiPro group in relation to HbA1c (mean ± SD - 1.1 ± 1.2%, P < 0.0001)

Usual Care

Odnoletkova et al. (2016), Belgiu m[52] To test the effectiveness of tele-coaching intervention on HbA1c with T2DM

574 (486); 63.1; 38.5

18 M (6+  12)

TEL

Nurse educator

(9) HbA1c, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, Triglycerides, Systolic blood pressure, Diastolic blood pressure, BMI, Weight

The difference in the means between the two groups was statistically significant favouring the coaching group.

Usual Care

Varney et al. (2014), Australi a[53] To evaluate the health coaching intervention’s long-term efficacy

94 (71); 64.1; 31.9

12 M (6 + 6)

TEL

Registered dietician

(13) HbA1C, Fasting glucose, cholesterol LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, Triglyceride, Systolic BP, Diastolic BP, Weight, BMI, Waist circumference Physical activity, K10 depression score

Significant effects were observed between groups at 6 months in relation to HbA1C (reductions in A1C up to 0.8%)(P = 0.03)

Usual Care

  1. ERPM/EA electronic remote patient monitoring/electronic assistance, FTF face to face, GRP group, TEL telephone, CAL clinical attachment loss, TBSES tooth-brushing self-efficacy, FVSS Fruit and Vegetable Screener score, SF-12 Short-Form Health Survey, PHQ Patient Health Questionnaire, DDS Diabetes Distress Scale, PAEL Positive and active engagement in life, HAD Health-directed activity, STA Skill and technique acquisition, ADS Appraisal of Diabetes Scale, HDL High-density lipoprotein, CAASMI Constructive attitudes and approaches Self-monitoring and insight, ISEL-12 Interpersonal Support Evaluation List, HSN Health service navigation, SIS Social integration and support, Emotional well-being EWB, LDL Low-density lipoprotein, HTS Healthcare team support, RSC Reinforcement for self-care, ASC Awareness of self-care goals, ASK Adherence Starts with Knowledge, MAS Morisky Adherence Scale, PAM Patient Activation Measure,), BFS Benefit-Finding Scale, PSS-4 Perceived Stress Scale, ADDQoL-19 19-item Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life scale