AIM: To evaluate changes in self-efficacy for self-management in young people with Type 1 diabetes participating in a "NegotiatedTelephone Support" (NTS) intervention developed using the principles of problem solving and social learning theory. METHODS: One-year RCT with 79 young people (male 39; mean age +/- sd 16.5 +/- 3.2 years, duration 6.7 +/- 4.4 years, HbA(1c) 8.6 +/- 1.5%) randomized into: Group 1 (control group), continued routine management, n = 28; Group 2, continued routine management with NTS, n = 25; Group 3, annual clinic with NTS, n = 26. OUTCOME MEASURES: HbA(1c), self-efficacy, barriers to adherence, problem solving, and diabetes knowledge. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups at baseline. Participants in Groups 2 and 3 received an average of 16 telephone calls/year (range 5-19), median duration 9 min (2-30), with a median interval of 3 weeks (1-24) between calls. Significant correlations were found between age and average length of call (r = 0.44, P < 0.01) and frequency of contact (r = 0.36, P < 0.05). Social and school topics were discussed frequently. After 1 year, while the participants in the two intervention groups showed significant improvements in self-efficacy (P = 0.035), there was no difference in glycaemic control in the three groups. Barriers to insulin use adherence were a significant predictor of HbA(1c) (P < 0.001) after controlling for baseline. CONCLUSIONS:NTS is an effective medium to deliver a simple theory-based psychological intervention to enhance self-efficacy for diabetes self-management. Reduced clinic attendance, combined with NTS, did not result in a deterioration of HbA(1c). Intensive personal support needs to be combined with intensive diabetes therapy to improve glycaemic control in this age group.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To evaluate changes in self-efficacy for self-management in young people with Type 1 diabetes participating in a "Negotiated Telephone Support" (NTS) intervention developed using the principles of problem solving and social learning theory. METHODS: One-year RCT with 79 young people (male 39; mean age +/- sd 16.5 +/- 3.2 years, duration 6.7 +/- 4.4 years, HbA(1c) 8.6 +/- 1.5%) randomized into: Group 1 (control group), continued routine management, n = 28; Group 2, continued routine management with NTS, n = 25; Group 3, annual clinic with NTS, n = 26. OUTCOME MEASURES: HbA(1c), self-efficacy, barriers to adherence, problem solving, and diabetes knowledge. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups at baseline. Participants in Groups 2 and 3 received an average of 16 telephone calls/year (range 5-19), median duration 9 min (2-30), with a median interval of 3 weeks (1-24) between calls. Significant correlations were found between age and average length of call (r = 0.44, P < 0.01) and frequency of contact (r = 0.36, P < 0.05). Social and school topics were discussed frequently. After 1 year, while the participants in the two intervention groups showed significant improvements in self-efficacy (P = 0.035), there was no difference in glycaemic control in the three groups. Barriers to insulin use adherence were a significant predictor of HbA(1c) (P < 0.001) after controlling for baseline. CONCLUSIONS:NTS is an effective medium to deliver a simple theory-based psychological intervention to enhance self-efficacy for diabetes self-management. Reduced clinic attendance, combined with NTS, did not result in a deterioration of HbA(1c). Intensive personal support needs to be combined with intensive diabetes therapy to improve glycaemic control in this age group.
Authors: Michael Seid; Elizabeth J D'Amico; James W Varni; Jennifer K Munafo; Maria T Britto; Carolyn M Kercsmar; Dennis Drotar; Eileen C King; Lynn Darbie Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2011-12-13
Authors: Amy J Hoffman; Alexander von Eye; Audrey G Gift; Barbara A Given; Charles W Given; Marilyn Rothert Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2011 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Tai-Hing Lam; Abu Saleh M Abdullah; Sophia S C Chan; Anthony J Hedley Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2004-07-29 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Heather D Lehmkuhl; Eric A Storch; Christina Cammarata; Kara Meyer; Omar Rahman; Janet Silverstein; Toree Malasanos; Gary Geffken Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2010-01-01
Authors: Dan Kent; Linda Haas; David Randal; Elizabeth Lin; Carolyn T Thorpe; Suzanne A Boren; Jan Fisher; Joan Heins; Patrick Lustman; Joe Nelson; Laurie Ruggiero; Tim Wysocki; Karen Fitzner; Dawn Sherr; Annette Lenzi Martin Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Elizabeth J Mayer-Davis; David M Maahs; Michael Seid; Jamie Crandell; Franziska K Bishop; Kimberly A Driscoll; Christine M Hunter; Jessica C Kichler; Debra Standiford; Joan M Thomas Journal: Lancet Child Adolesc Health Date: 2018-07-30
Authors: D H Grossoehme; E Smith; D Standiford; N Morwessel; J Kichler; D M Maahs; K Driscoll; M Seid Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 4.359