A 360° Approach to Personalize Lifestyle Treatment in Primary Care for People With Type 2 Diabetes: Feasibility Study

Background: Given the multifactorial nature of type 2 diabetes (T2D), health care for this condition would benefit from a holistic approach and multidisciplinary consultation. To address this, we developed the web-based 360-degree (360 degrees) diagnostic tool, which assesses 4 key domains: "body" (physical health parameters), "thinking and feeling" (eg, mental health and stress), "behavior" (lifestylefactors), and "environment" (eg, work and housing conditions). Objective: This work examines the acceptability, implementation, and potential effects of the 360 degrees diagnostic tool and subsequent tailored treatment (360 degrees approach) in a 6-month intervention and feasibility study conducted in standard primary health care settings in the Netherlands. Methods: A single-group design with baseline, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups was used. A total of 15 people with T2D and their health care providers from 2 practices participated in a 6-month intervention, which included the 360 degrees diagnosis, tailored treatment, and both individual and group consultations. The 360 degrees diagnosis involved clinical measurements for the "body" domain and self-reports for the "thinking and feeling," "behavior," and "environment" domains. After multidisciplinary consultations involving the general practitioner, pharmacist, nurse practitioner (NP), and dietitian, the NP and dietitian provided tailored advice, lifestyle treatment, and ongoing support. At the end of the intervention, face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with health care professionals (n=6) and participants (n=13) to assess the acceptability and implementation of the 360 degrees approach in primary health care. Additionally, data from 14 participants on the "thinking and feeling" and "behavior" domains at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months were analyzed to assess changes over time. Results: The semistructured interviews revealed that both participants with T2D and health care professionals were generally positive about various aspects of the 360 degrees approach, including onboarding, data collection with the 360 degrees diagnosis, consultations and advicefrom the NP and dietitian, the visual representation of parameters in the profile wheel, counseling during the intervention (including professional collaboration), and the group meetings. The interviews also identified factors that promoted or hindered the implementation of the 360 degrees approach. Promoting factors included (1) the care, attention, support, and experienceof professionals; (2) the multidisciplinary team; (3) social support; and (4) the experience of positive health effects. Hindering factors included (1) too much information, (2) survey-related issues, and (3) time-consuming counseling. In terms of effects over time, improvements were observed at 3 months in mental health, diabetes-related problems, and fast-food consumption. At 6 months, there was a reduction in perceived stress and fast-food consumption. Additionally, fruit intake decreased at both 3 and 6 months. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the 360 degrees approach is acceptable to both people with T2D and health care professionals, implementable, and potentially effective in fostering positive health changes. Overall, it appears feasible to implement the 360 degrees approach in standard primary health care. TrialRegistration: Netherlands Trial RegisterNL-7509/NL-OMON45788; https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/nl/trial/45788