CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07767331PRODIAPUpdated Aug 17, 2026

PRODIAP - Patient-reported Outcomes in General Practice Among People With Type 2 Diabetes

An interventional study of Use of PRO questionnaire in general practice in Type 2 Diabetes, sponsored by University of Aarhus. Recruiting at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-17.

Sponsored by University of Aarhus · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
2,000
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

In Denmark, around 327,000 diabetes consultations take place annually in general practice, but these often fail to fully include patients' experiences, values, and needs. Research, mainly among people with type 1 diabetes, suggests that the use of Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) can enhance patient engagement and consultation quality. Yet, little is known about the effect of using PROs in type 2 diabetes (T2D) care in general practice. This project, PRODIAP (Patient-reported outcomes in general practice among people with type 2 diabetes) aims to investigate whether the use of a diabetes-specific PRO questionnaire can improve care quality and support more individualised consultations for people with T2D. PRODIAP is tailored to general practice, adapted from hospital PRO tools, and pilot testing showed promising feasibility and acceptability.

This project applies a mixed-methods design with two sub-studies:

  1. A pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial in 30 general practices (N≈2000 patients) evaluating PRODIAP's effect on perceived care quality with patient perceived quality of care (PACIC) as primary outcome.
  2. A qualitative study using observations and interviews to explore how PRODIAP shapes the consultation from both patient and professional perspectives.

The project group has established a national collaboration with general practitioners, researchers and stakeholders from all five Danish region, supporting the feasibility of this study. Findings are expected to improve diabetes care in general practice and inform management of other chronic conditions. Findings are expected to improve diabetes care in general practice and provide transferable knowledge for other chronic conditions.

02

Conditions studied

  • Type 2 Diabetes

Keywords

  • Patient Reported Outcome (PRO)
  • General Practice (GP)
  • Randomised controlled trial
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • type 2 diabetes
  • able to understand and answer a Danish questionnaire

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • none
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
2,000 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Type 2 diabetes patients_intervention

    Patients with type 2 diabetes in general practices randomised to the intervention group will answer a diabetes-specific PRO questionnaire (PRODIAP) in the annual consultations

    Behavioral: Use of PRO questionnaire in general practice

  • No intervention
    Type 2 diabetes patients_control

    Patients in general practices randomised to the control group

Interventions

  • BehavioralUse of PRO questionnaire in general practice

    Participants are people with type 2 diabetes, receiving treatment in GP. 30 GPs will be recruited from the Regions of Central Jutland, Zealand, and Southern Denmark, and from here, about 2,000 people (+18) with T2D are recruited. The 30 participating GPs will be randomly assigned to either the intervention (15 GPs) or control (15 GPs) group. The annual consultations in the intervention group will be based on responses to a diabetes-specific PRO questionnaire (PRODIAP) from the persons with T2D, while the control group will follow the usual process without PRODIAP.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Patient Assessment Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)

    Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) assesses patient-perceived quality of care among individuals with T2D. PACIC consists of 20 items divided into five subscales with the following themes: patient activation, decision support, goal setting, problem-solving, and coordination/follow-up. PACIC is scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). The total PACIC score is calculated as the mean of all items and as the mean of the five subscales

    Time frame: "Baseline" - up to 2 weeks before the patients attend their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 1 "Endpoint" - up to 2 weeks after the patients attended their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 2

Secondary outcomes

  1. Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c)

    Average level of blood glucose over the past two to three months. Collected from laboratory data base

    Time frame: "Baseline" - up to 2 weeks before the patients attend their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 1 "Endpoint" - up to 2 weeks after the patients attended their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 2

Other outcomes

  1. Health related quality of live (EQ-5D-5L)

    Health related quality of live is measured using the EQ-5D-5L which in turn is used to estimate quality-adjusted life year (QALY). EQ-5D-5L comprises five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The patient is asked to indicate his/her health state by ticking the box next to the most appropriate statement in each of the five dimensions. This decision results in a 1-digit number that expresses the level selected for that dimension. The digits for the five dimensions can be combined into a 5-digit number that describes the patient's health state.

    Time frame: "Baseline" - up to 2 weeks before the patients attend their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 1 "Endpoint" - up to 2 weeks after the patients attended their yearly check-up at the general practitioner at year 2

  2. Resource use (costs)

    Resource use associated with the intervention and derived costs in the health care sector. Measured in DKK.

    Time frame: "through study completion, an average of 1½ year"

06

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Steno Diabetes Center Aarhus
    Aarhus, 8200, Denmark
    Recruiting
07

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07767331
Lead sponsor
University of Aarhus
Collaborators
Steno Diabetes Center Odense, Steno Diabetes Center Sjaelland, Aarhus University Hospital
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 17, 2026
Start date
Mar 1, 2026
Primary completion
Feb 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Feb 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 17, 2026

Study contacts

Anette Andersen, MD, PhD
Contact
anette.andersen@rm.dk
+4522135605
Katrine B Bonnén, MSc in Public Health
Contact
KATBON@rm.dk

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion