| Literature DB >> 30800684 |
Fan Zheng1, Suixin Liu1, Yuan Liu1, Lihua Deng1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study is aimed at assessing the effectiveness of a simple outpatient diabetes self-management education programme.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30800684 PMCID: PMC6360047 DOI: 10.1155/2019/1073131
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Res Impact factor: 4.011
Figure 1Presentation of the research flow chart.
General information about the sample (n = 60).
| Item | CG ( | IG ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 51.92 ± 12.30 | 52.52 ± 10.46 | 0.20 |
|
| Disease course (years) | 2.33 ± 1.58 | 2.59 ± 1.89 | 0.58 |
|
| Weight (kg) | 72.46 ± 1.96 | 71.56 ± 1.64 | -1.93 |
|
| Male : female | 17 : 13 | 16 : 14 | 0.07 |
|
| Education (years) | 9.52 ± 4.20 | 9.38 ± 3.70 | -0.14 |
|
| Urban : rural | 11 : 19 | 15 : 15 | 1.09 |
|
| Physically active : inactive | 5 : 25 | 3 : 27 | 0.58 |
|
| Smoker : nonsmoker | 1 : 29 | 3 : 27 | 1.07 |
|
| Insulin injection : OADs | 4 : 21 | 5 : 23 | 0.03 |
|
CG: control group; IG: intervention group; OADs: oral antidiabetic agents.
Results of diabetes self-care activities measure and problem areas in diabetes (n = 60).
| Item | Rating scale (points) | Mean ± SD (points) | Stratification percentage | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good (normal, %) | Fair (pain, %) | Poor (severe, %) | |||
| Dietary control | 0–7 | 4.18 ± 1.73 | 28.5 | 17.0 | 54.5 |
| Physical activity | 0–7 | 3.18 ± 2.35 | 25 | 9 | 66.0 |
| Medication adherence | 0–7 | 5.25 ± 1.66 | 79 | 2 | 19 |
| Blood glucose monitoring | 0–7 | 2.44 ± 1.26 | 19 | 4 | 77 |
| Foot care | 0–7 | 2.40 ± 1.02 | 15 | 4 | 81 |
| SDSCA score | 0–35 | 17.60 ± 6.63 | 8 | 28 | 64 |
| PAID score | 0–100 | 29.82 ± 15.22 | 73 | 27 | 9 |
The ranking method: summary of diabetes self-care activities measure scores: total points > 28 or single item > 5.6 scores was good, 21–28 was normal, and <21 or single item < 4.2 was poor. Problem areas in diabetes scores between 0 and 33 were believed to be normal, >33 points meant a diabetes-related mental pain, and >44 points indicated severe mental problems.
SDSCA score, PAID score, and blood glucose level of the two groups before and after the intervention (mean ± SD, n = 60).
| Item | Before |
|
| After |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CG ( | IG ( | CG ( | IG ( | |||||
| SDSCA (scores) | 17.72 ± 7.21 | 17.47 ± 6.11 | -0.14 |
| 18.62 ± 1.31 | 22.80 ± 4.86 | 4.55 |
|
| Dietary control (scores) | 4.13 ± 1.86 | 4.23 ± 1.62 | 0.22 |
| 4.53 ± 0.86 | 5.75 ± 0.28 | 7.39 |
|
| Physical activity (scores) | 3.25 ± 2.47 | 3.11 ± 2.27 | -0.23 |
| 3.82 ± 1.27 | 5.37 ± 0.56 | 6.12 |
|
| Medication adherence (scores) | 5.25 ± 2.03 | 5.24 ± 1.21 | -0.02 |
| 5.75 ± 2.33 | 6.52 ± 0.81 | 1.71 |
|
| Blood glucose monitoring (scores) | 2.55 ± 1.41 | 2.33 ± 1.12 | -0.67 |
| 2.65 ± 0.55 | 2.55 ± 1.08 | -0.45 |
|
| Foot care (scores) | 2.52 ± 1.03 | 2.28 ± 1.01 | -0.91 |
| 2.63 ± 1.02 | 3.43 ± 0.85 | 3.30 |
|
| PAID (scores) | 30.72 ± 15.86 | 28.91 ± 14.76 | -0.46 |
| 26.57 ± 12.50 | 21.15 ± 0.25 | -2.37 |
|
| FBG (mmol/L) | 8.48 ± 1.10 | 8.35 ± 1.21 | -0.44 |
| 7.48 ± 1.10 | 6.11 ± 0.72 | -5.72 |
|
| PBG (mmol/L) | 13.96 ± 3.72 | 13.67 ± 1.12 | -0.41 |
| 12.16 ± 1.72 | 9.04 ± 1.40 | -7.71 |
|
| HbA1c (mmol/L) | 8.48 ± 0.40 | 8.30 ± 1.02 | -0.89 |
| 8.53 ± 0.72 | 6.34 ± 0.87 | -10.62 |
|
CG: control group; IG: intervention group; FBG: fasting blood glucose; PBG: postprandial blood glucose; HbA1c: glycosylated hemoglobin. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.