AIMS: To improve patient-centred care by determining the impact of baseline levels of conscientiousness and diabetes self-efficacy on the outcomes of efficacious interventions to reduce diabetes distress and improve disease management. METHODS:Adults with Type 2 diabetes with diabetes distress and self-care problems (N = 392) were randomized to one of three distress reduction interventions: computer-assisted self-management; computer-assisted self-management plus problem-solving therapy; and health education. The baseline assessment included conscientiousness and self-efficacy, demographics, diabetes status, regimen distress, emotional burden, medication adherence, diet and physical activity. Changes in regimen distress, emotional burden and self-care between baseline and 12 months were recorded and ancova models assessed how conscientiousness and self-efficacy qualified the significant improvements in distress and management outcomes. RESULTS: Participants with high baseline conscientiousness displayed significantly larger improvements in medication adherence and emotional burden than participants with low baseline conscientiousness. Participants with high baseline self-efficacy showed greater improvements in diet, physical activity and regimen distress than participants with low baseline self-efficacy. The impact of conscientiousness and self-efficacy were independent of each other and occurred across all three intervention groups. A significant interaction indicated that those with both high self-efficacy and high conscientiousness at baseline had the biggest improvement in physical activity by 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both broad personal traits and disease-specific expectations qualify the outcomes of efficacious interventions. These findings reinforce the need to change from a one-size-fits-all approach to diabetes interventions to an approach that crafts clinical interventions in ways that fit the personal traits and skills of individual people.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To improve patient-centred care by determining the impact of baseline levels of conscientiousness and diabetes self-efficacy on the outcomes of efficacious interventions to reduce diabetes distress and improve disease management. METHODS: Adults with Type 2 diabetes with diabetes distress and self-care problems (N = 392) were randomized to one of three distress reduction interventions: computer-assisted self-management; computer-assisted self-management plus problem-solving therapy; and health education. The baseline assessment included conscientiousness and self-efficacy, demographics, diabetes status, regimen distress, emotional burden, medication adherence, diet and physical activity. Changes in regimen distress, emotional burden and self-care between baseline and 12 months were recorded and ancova models assessed how conscientiousness and self-efficacy qualified the significant improvements in distress and management outcomes. RESULTS:Participants with high baseline conscientiousness displayed significantly larger improvements in medication adherence and emotional burden than participants with low baseline conscientiousness. Participants with high baseline self-efficacy showed greater improvements in diet, physical activity and regimen distress than participants with low baseline self-efficacy. The impact of conscientiousness and self-efficacy were independent of each other and occurred across all three intervention groups. A significant interaction indicated that those with both high self-efficacy and high conscientiousness at baseline had the biggest improvement in physical activity by 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both broad personal traits and disease-specific expectations qualify the outcomes of efficacious interventions. These findings reinforce the need to change from a one-size-fits-all approach to diabetes interventions to an approach that crafts clinical interventions in ways that fit the personal traits and skills of individual people.
Authors: William H Polonsky; Lawrence Fisher; Jay Earles; R James Dudl; Joel Lees; Joseph Mullan; Richard A Jackson Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Russell E Glasgow; Deanna Kurz; Diane King; Jennifer M Dickman; Andrew J Faber; Eve Halterman; Tim Wooley; Deborah J Toobert; Lisa A Strycker; Paul A Estabrooks; Diego Osuna; Debra Ritzwoller Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-08-17 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lawrence Fisher; Russell E Glasgow; Joseph T Mullan; Marilyn M Skaff; William H Polonsky Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Lawrence Fisher; Danielle Hessler; Russell E Glasgow; Patricia A Arean; Umesh Masharani; Diana Naranjo; Lisa A Strycker Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-06-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Elizabeth Murray; Eric B Hekler; Gerhard Andersson; Linda M Collins; Aiden Doherty; Chris Hollis; Daniel E Rivera; Robert West; Jeremy C Wyatt Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Maureen Markle-Reid; Jenny Ploeg; Kimberly D Fraser; Kathryn Ann Fisher; Noori Akhtar-Danesh; Amy Bartholomew; Amiram Gafni; Andrea Gruneir; Sandra P Hirst; Sharon Kaasalainen; Caralyn Kelly Stradiotto; John Miklavcic; Carlos Rojas-Fernandez; Cheryl A Sadowski; Lehana Thabane; Jean A C Triscott; Ross Upshur Journal: Trials Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Robert A Bailey; Michael Pfeifer; Alicia C Shillington; Qing Harshaw; Martha M Funnell; Jeffrey VanWingen; Nanada Col Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-01-14 Impact factor: 2.655