To the Editor: Harris and colleagues report failure to obtain reduction in several important risk factor-based intermediate outcomes for vascular disease from their lifestyle intervention in the Health Improvement and Prevention Study (HIPS).1 Using intention-to-treat analysis, if only 117 of 384 participants completed at least two of six group sessions, a positive result could not be expected. We know that interventions for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes can be run successfully in Australian primary care, which raises questions about the design of Harris et al’s intervention.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Harris MF, Fanaian M, Jayasinghe UW, et al. A cluster randomised controlled trial of vascular risk factor management in general practice. Med J Aust 2012; 197: 387-393. <MJA full text>
- 2. Laatikainen T, Dunbar J, Chapman A, et al. Prevention of type 2 diabetes by lifestyle intervention in an Australian primary health care setting: Greater Green Triangle (GGT) Diabetes Prevention Project. BMC Public Health 2007; 7: 249-256.
- 3. Laatikainen T, Philpot B, Hankonen N, et al. Predicting changes in lifestyle and clinical outcomes in preventing diabetes: the Greater Green Triangle Diabetes Prevention Project. Prev Med 2012; 54: 157-161.
- 4. West R. Time for a change: putting the Transtheoretical (Stages of Change) Model to rest. Addiction 2005; 100: 1036-1039.
- 5. Oldenburg B, Absetz P, Dunbar J, et al. The spread of diabetes prevention programs around the world: a case study from Finland and Australia. Transl Behav Med 2011; 1: 270-282.
No relevant disclosures.