Aims: To select a core list of standard outcomes for diabetes to be routinely applied internationally, including patient‐reported outcomes.Methods: We conducted a structured systematic review of outcome measures, focusing on adults with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes. This process was followed by a consensus‐driven modified Delphi panel, including a multidisciplinary group of academics, health professionals and people with diabetes. External feedback to validate the set of outcome measures was sought from people with diabetes and health professionals.Results: The panel identified an essential set of clinical outcomes related to diabetes control, acute events, chronic complications, health service utilisation, and survival that can be measured using routine administrative data and/or clinical records. Three instruments were recommended for annual measurement of patient‐reported outcome measures: the WHO Well‐Being Index for psychological well‐being; the depression module of the Patient Health Questionnaire for depression; and the Problem Areas in Diabetes scale for diabetes distress. A range of factors related to demographic, diagnostic profile, lifestyle, social support and treatment of diabetes were also identified for case‐mix adjustment.Conclusions: We recommend the standard set identified in this study for use in routine practice to monitor, benchmark and improve diabetes care. The inclusion of patient‐reported outcomes enables people living with diabetes to report directly on their condition in a structured way.

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) has been hailed as a potential gamechanger for non-communicable disease (NCD) management, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Individual studies illustrate barriers to implementation and scale-up, but an overview of implementation issues for NCD mHealth interventions in LMIC is lacking. This paper explores implementation issues from two perspectives: information in published papers and field-based knowledge by people working in this field. Methods: Through a scoping review publications on mHealth interventions for NCDs in LMIC were identified and assessed with the WHO mHealth Evidence Reporting and Assessment (mERA) tool. A two-stage web-based survey on implementation barriers was performed within a NCD research network and through two online platforms on mHealth targeting researchers and implementors. Results: 16 studies were included in the scoping review. Short Message Service (SMS) messaging was the main implementation tool. Most studies focused on patient-centered outcomes. Most studies did not report on process measures and on contextual conditions influencing implementation decisions. Few publications reported on implementation barriers. The websurvey included twelve projects and the responses revealed additional information, especially on practical barriers related to the patients’ characteristics, low demand, technical requirements, integration with health services and with the wider context. Many interventions used low-cost software and devices with limited capacity that not allowed linkage with routine data or patient records, which incurred fragmented delivery and increased workload. Conclusion: Text messaging is a dominant mHealth tool for patient-directed of quality improvement interventions in LMIC. Publications report little on implementation barriers, while a questionnaire among implementors reveals significant barriers and strategies to address them. This information is relevant for decisions on scale-up of mHealth in the domain of NCD. Further knowledge should be gathered on implementation issues, and the conditions that allow universal coverage.

Empowerment interventions for chronic diseases are an evolving process. No agreement exists regarding the necessary components and methodologies to be applied. Systematic reviews have assessed the effect of self-management interventions. Improvements in illness beliefs, adherence to drug therapy and glucose monitoring have been reported. In the long term, no major changes have been achieved in weight, physical activity, smoking status, and depression scores. There is a need for additional studies. The CAIPaDi (Centro de Atención Integral del Paciente con Diabetes) program is an intervention designed to provide education and empowerment techniques (using simple low-cost interactive tools) over a short period of time followed by at-distance support using internet or cell phone technology. The target population consists of patients with type 2 diabetes, free of chronic complications who are non-smokers. The intervention is composed of four monthly visits followed by a continuous at-distance support system. At each visit, patients stay for six hours in the center. Information is presented in group sessions. Empowerment techniques are applied during individual exchanges with the team or during facilitated group sessions. In summary, empowerment programs are an unmet need in many healthcare services. This review also discusses relevant studies and patents in the management of type 2 diabetes.