| Literature DB >> 32341773 |
Mary Beth Weber1, Monique M Hennink1, K M Venkat Narayan1.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop and test the feasibility of a culturally tailored Diabetes Prevention Programme (DPP) for US South Asians, a large population with high diabetes risk. Design: The South Asian Health and Prevention Education (SHAPE) study included: (1) focus group discussions with South Asian adults to understand views of lifestyle behaviours and diabetes prevention; (2) modification of the US DPP for South Asians and (3) a pilot, pre-post study to test the feasibility and impact of delivering the culturally tailored programme. Setting: The study was conducted in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Focus group discussions and intervention classes were held at locations within the community (eg, South Asian restaurants, a public library, university classrooms, a South Asian owned physical therapy studio). Participants: The focus group discussions (n=17 with 109 individuals) included adults aged 25 years of older who self-identified as South Asian. Groups were stratified by age (25-40 years or older than 40 years) and sex. The SHAPE pilot study included 17 (76.5% male with a mean age of 46.9±12 years) South Asian adults aged 25 years or older with pre-diabetes and body mass index (BMI) >22 kg/m2.Entities:
Keywords: diabetes mellitus, type 2; healthy lifestyle; mixed methods research
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32341773 PMCID: PMC7174025 DOI: 10.1136/fmch-2019-000295
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Fam Med Community Health ISSN: 2305-6983
Demographic characteristics of focus group discussion participants by age and gender
| Age–gender group* | # of groups | Hindu, % | Married, % | US born, % | Mean years in the USA | Home ownership, % | History of diabetes†, % | Education level |
| Older males | 4 | 62.5 | 94.3 | 0 | 22.1 | 65.7 | 55.6 | ≥Primary school |
| Older | 5 | 69.2 | 72.0 | 0 | 25.1 | 77.0 | 48.5 | ≥Primary school |
| Younger males | 4 | 67.8 | 42.8 | 24.3 | 10.6 | 48.0 | 7.0 | ≥College |
| Younger females | 4 | 80.3 | 37.8 | 29.0 | 11.8 | 72.3 | 0 | ≥College |
*Younger age group includes participants aged 25–39 years. Older age group includes participants aged 40 years or older.
†History of diabetes includes type 2 diabetes or gestational diabetes.
Domains affecting lifestyle behaviours in US South Asians
| Domains | Behavioural impacts | How diet and physical activity choices are affected | Example quotations |
| In the USA, unhealthy dietary choices and inactivity is easy. | Prevalence of cars, elevators and climate-controlled environments in the USA make it easier to be inactive. Variety of foods and low cost oil, sugar, and dairy products in the USA lead to eating more and increasing fat and calorie intake. Lack of vegetarian options results in less healthy diets. Faster pace of life makes traditional, time-consuming cooking methods impractical, resulting in reliance on processed, canned and frozen foods. | ‘When you come to this place [US] you wanna try first of all, all these kinds of foods, not realizing that they are harming your body right now, so I would think that they are not aware of it initially, they come to know after the fact.’ (Younger Woman) | |
| Men are expected to provide financially for their family, leaving little time for exercise or healthy eating. | Men are culturally primed to focus on academic success, affecting views of exercise as adults. Men work long hours and skip meals during the day, making exercise difficult and resulting in overeating at night. Saving money is more important than investing in health. To secure a good marriage, a good education and job are more important than their physical appearance. Little need to be physically attractive to spouse after children are born | ‘There are a lot of issues like family, children, fee structure, planning finances, so health takes a backseat in that. It’s not like we- we don't… want to be healthy, we want to look good but, uh, the emphasis is- is currently on career, family’ (Younger Male). | |
| Women are culturally expected to focus on family care and household duties, while personal healthcare is secondary. | Women ‘let themselves go’ after having a baby. Exercise is viewed only a weight loss tool, not a lifestyle choice. | ‘We Indian people spoiled our men by giving everything in their hands, so they are lazy so they want us to pay more attention… we say, oh I am going to gym—no, no, no, I need you here. I need this thing, and I need this thing to be done’ (Older Female). | |
| Food is central to South Asian culture. Food choice is driven by taste and ‘healthy foods’ are viewed as being less tasty. | Although the South Asian diet can be healthy, South Asian Americans choose the less healthy foods more often (eg, fried snacks), add in less healthy ingredients (eg, extra cheese or oil/ghee), cook healthy foods in unhealthy ways (eg, frying or overcooking vegetables), eat large portion sizes, and rarely make trade-offs by choosing healthy foods to counterbalance the unhealthy. Women often provide family/guests with large servings to show affection, and people have grown accustomed to eating these large portions. | ‘I went to a party … and there was a layer of [oil] in a big tray … so me and my friend … we just drained the oil out. And the lady who had cooked it, she saw us take-draining oil out so she took the food back in, put the oil back in and brought it out …. there’s some stubborn people like that’ (Older Female). |
Modifications to the US Diabetes Prevention Programme (DPP) for the SHAPE Programme
| US DPP curriculum | SHAPE curriculum | Reason for change |
| Individual lessons led by a trained lifestyle coach | Group-based lessons led by a trained lifestyle coach | Increase social support among participants |
| Diet examples in class reflected the wider US population | Examples were modified to better reflect South Asian foods and holidays | Improve cultural appropriateness |
| Portion size recommendations were included in one lesson | Portion sizes were discussed during several lessons and focused on foods often eaten in excess (eg, rice, breads) | Portion sizes were identified as a major contributor to overeating |
| Participants were taught to overcome barriers to activity, with a large focus on internally derived barriers | Discussions of barriers included several exercises to practice talking to family and friends about the programme and helping them be more supportive | Family and social support are important barriers—and motivators—for lifestyle choices |
| Coach and participant worked one on one to discuss the programme information, overcoming barriers, and building social support | Each class included a group activity and ample interaction and discussion time | Build social support among the class and identify and find solutions for culturally specific barriers |
| Only the participant attended each class | Participants were encouraged to invite family members to classes | Build social support and make family members a source of motivation (and not a barrier) for behaviour change |
| Lifestyle coach is the main source of programme support | Participants were divided into small groups of 4–5 participants. Groups worked together in class and were encouraged to interaction outside of class time | Build social support |
| Exercise (overcoming barriers, increasing amount and exertion level, safety) was discussed during sessions with lifestyle coach | Added more basic exercise training (eg, exercise safety, stretching, basic strength training and increasing level of exertion), invited an exercise trainer to come to some classes, and offered optional group walks after most lessons | Build a strong foundation for exercise within a population with less exercise experience or working knowledge |
SHAPE, South Asian Health and Prevention Education.
Cardiometabolic risk factors at baseline to 6 months, N (%) or mean (SD)
| Variable | Baseline for all participants | Baseline for participants with follow-up data | Six months |
| Normoglycaemia | 1 (5.9%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (55.6%) |
| Isolated IGT | 3 (17.7%) | 3 (33.3%) | 2 (22.2%) |
| Isolated IFG | 7 (41.2%) | 3 (33.3%) | 1 (11.1%) |
| IGT+IFG | 6 (35.3%) | 3 (33.3%) | 1 (11.1%) |
| Type 2 diabetes mellitus | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| HbA1c (%)* | 5.8 (0.4) | 5.9 (0.5) | 5.7 (0.4) |
| Normal weight BMI | 1 (5.9%) | 0 (0%) | 3 (33.3%) |
| Overweight BMI | 7 (41.2%) | 2 (22.2%) | 2 (22.2%) |
| Obese BMI | 9 (52.9%) | 7 (77.8%) | 4 (44.4%) |
| High waist circumference | 14 (82.4%) | 8 (88.9%) | 5 (55.6%) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 28.9 (6.1) | 30.7 (5.1) | 26.2 (3.9) |
| Weight (kg) | 78.1 (13.8) | 80.3 (11.2) | 73.9 (14.8) |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 97.9 (10.9) | 99.7 (8.9) | 92.7 (12.0) |
| Abdominal sagittal circumference (cm) | 23.6 (6.4) | 25.6 (7.6) | 20.9 (5.2) |
| Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) | 121.8 (9.8) | 124.3 (9.4) | 118.3 (14.2) |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg) | 78.8 (8.6) | 78.3 (8.8) | 77.1 (9.4) |
| Total cholesterol (mmol/l) | 4.8 (0.9) | 4.9 (1.0) | 4.4 (0.7) |
| LDL (mmol/L) | 3.3 (0.6) | 3.4 (0.8) | 3.0 (0.7) |
| HDL (mmol/L) | 1.0 (0.2) | 1.1 (0.3) | 1.0 (0.3) |
| Triglycerides (mmol/L) | 1.7 (0.7) | 1.5 (0.5) | 1.2 (0.5) |
*HbA1c cut-points are 5.7%–6.4%=pre-diabetes, 6.5% or greater=diabetes.
BMI, body mass index; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; LDL, low-density lipoprotein.