BACKGROUND: Social support is associated with better diabetes self-management behavior (SMB), yet interventions to increase family and friend support (FF support) have had inconsistent effects on SMB. OBJECTIVE: To test whether FF support differentially affects specific SMBs and compare the influence of support from health professionals and psychological factors on specific SMBs to that of FF support. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of people with diabetes recruited for a self-management intervention PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: One hundred sixty-four African-American and Latino adults with diabetes living in inner-city Detroit MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For every unit increase in FF support for glucose monitoring, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of completing testing as recommended was 1.77 (95% CI 1.21-2.58). FF support was not associated with four other SMBs (taking medicines, following a meal plan, physical activity, checking feet). Support from non-physician health professionals was associated with checking feet [AOR 1.72 (1.07-2.78)] and meal plan adherence [AOR = 1.61 (1.11-2.34)]. Diabetes self-efficacy was associated with testing sugar, meal plan adherence, and checking feet. Additional analyses suggested that self-efficacy was mediating the effect of FF support on diet and checking feet, but not the FF support effect on glucose monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The association between FF support and SMB performance was stronger for glucose monitoring than for other SMBs. Professional support and diabetes self-efficacy were each independently associated with performance of different SMBs. SMB interventions may need to differentially emphasize FF support, self-efficacy, or professional support depending on the SMB targeted for improvement.
BACKGROUND: Social support is associated with better diabetes self-management behavior (SMB), yet interventions to increase family and friend support (FF support) have had inconsistent effects on SMB. OBJECTIVE: To test whether FF support differentially affects specific SMBs and compare the influence of support from health professionals and psychological factors on specific SMBs to that of FF support. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of people with diabetes recruited for a self-management intervention PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: One hundred sixty-four African-American and Latino adults with diabetes living in inner-city Detroit MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For every unit increase in FF support for glucose monitoring, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of completing testing as recommended was 1.77 (95% CI 1.21-2.58). FF support was not associated with four other SMBs (taking medicines, following a meal plan, physical activity, checking feet). Support from non-physician health professionals was associated with checking feet [AOR 1.72 (1.07-2.78)] and meal plan adherence [AOR = 1.61 (1.11-2.34)]. Diabetes self-efficacy was associated with testing sugar, meal plan adherence, and checking feet. Additional analyses suggested that self-efficacy was mediating the effect of FF support on diet and checking feet, but not the FF support effect on glucose monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The association between FF support and SMB performance was stronger for glucose monitoring than for other SMBs. Professional support and diabetes self-efficacy were each independently associated with performance of different SMBs. SMB interventions may need to differentially emphasize FF support, self-efficacy, or professional support depending on the SMB targeted for improvement.
Authors: Shannon N Zenk; Amy J Schulz; Teretha Hollis-Neely; Richard T Campbell; Nellie Holmes; Gloria Watkins; Robin Nwankwo; Angela Odoms-Young Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Henk A van Dam; Frans G van der Horst; Lut Knoops; Richard M Ryckman; Harry F J M Crebolder; Bart H W van den Borne Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2004-12-29
Authors: Jacqueline Two Feathers; Edith C Kieffer; Gloria Palmisano; Mike Anderson; Brandy Sinco; Nancy Janz; Michele Heisler; Mike Spencer; Ricardo Guzman; Janice Thompson; Kimberlydawn Wisdom; Sherman A James Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2005-07-28 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lisa A Cooper; L Ebony Boulware; Edgar R Miller; Sherita Hill Golden; Kathryn A Carson; Gary Noronha; Mary Margaret Huizinga; Debra L Roter; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Lee R Bone; David M Levine; Felicia Hill-Briggs; Jeanne Charleston; Miyong Kim; Nae-Yuh Wang; Hanan Aboumatar; Jennifer P Halbert; Patti L Ephraim; Frederick L Brancati Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 9.308