ÜBERMAD

MotivationReview

Teaching led by nurses may lower blood sugar after three months

No differenceThe short version

In the first three months, nurse-led teaching made no clear difference to blood sugar (HbA1c).

A nurse points from one section of a divided plate to the next while an older man sits calmly across the table.
1,654
adults with type 2 diabetes

The review

  1. Who took part

    Eight trials with 1,654 adults who had type 2 diabetes. Most trials were in Asia, and ages generally ran from 40 to 80.

  2. What they did

    People had 4 to 12 nurse-led teaching sessions, one to one or in groups, over 3 months to 2.5 years. The other group had usual care or minimal teaching.

  3. What happened

    Blood sugar (HbA1c) was lower than in the other group at 3 to 6 months and after 6 months. The first 3 months showed no clear difference, and confidence in managing diabetes was higher, though the trials varied a lot. Fasting blood sugar fell a little, good cholesterol (HDL) rose a little, and other fats showed no clear change.

What the review found

  1. No differenceOther outcomes

    In the first three months, nurse-led teaching made no clear difference to blood sugar (HbA1c).

    Pooled analysis of 0 studies · vs people who got usual care or minimal teaching · ⚠ the studies disagreed a lot; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited

  2. HelpedOther outcomes

    People who had nurse-led teaching had lower blood sugar (HbA1c) at three to six months.

    Pooled analysis of 0 studies · vs people who got usual care or minimal teaching · ⚠ the studies disagreed a lot; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited

  3. HelpedOther outcomes

    After six months, people who had nurse-led teaching still had lower blood sugar (HbA1c).

    Pooled analysis of 0 studies · vs people who got usual care or minimal teaching · ⚠ the studies disagreed a lot; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited

  4. People who had nurse-led teaching felt more sure about managing their diabetes.

    Pooled analysis of 4 studies · vs people who got usual care or minimal teaching · they rated themselves · ⚠ signs that small negative studies went unpublished; results look too good to be true; the studies disagreed a lot; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited

How solid is this?

  • Large group
  • Numbers unreliable
  • Whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
  • Signs that small negative studies went unpublished

Source

Impact of nurse-led self-management education on type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis (2025)

DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1622988 (opens in a new tab)

More on motivation

See all