Diletta Fabrizi1, Paola Rebora2, Michela Luciani3, Stefania Di Mauro1, Maria Grazia Valsecchi2, Davide Ausili1. 1. Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy. 2. Bicocca Bioinformatics Biostatistics And Bioimaging Centre-B4, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy. 3. Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy. michela.luciani@unimib.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate how self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management affect glycated haemoglobin in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and to set cut-off points of the Self-Care of Diabetes Inventory scales using glycated haemoglobin as outcome of interest. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a previous multicentre observational cross-sectional study was conducted. Overall, 540 adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus confirmed diagnosis were involved. Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected. Self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management were measured by the Self-Care of Diabetes Inventory. Linear regression models were performed to assess the relationship between self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management and glycated haemoglobin. Receiver operating characteristics curves were carried out to identify the best cut-off score for each self-care scale considering glycated haemoglobin >7% as outcome of interest. RESULTS: Self-care monitoring and self-care management were associated to glycated haemoglobin in both patients without (self-care monitoring p = 0.0008; self-care management p = 0.0178) and with insulin therapy (self-care monitoring p = 0.0007; self-care management p = 0.0224). Self-care maintenance was associated to glycated haemoglobin in patients without insulin therapy (p = 0.0118). Cut-off scores providing the best performance were 70 points for self-care maintenance and self-care monitoring, and 60 points for self-care management. CONCLUSIONS: Self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management differently affect glycated haemoglobin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clinicians could implement tailored interventions to improve glycaemic control considering the lacking area of self-care.
PURPOSE: To evaluate how self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management affect glycated haemoglobin in type 2 diabetes mellituspatients and to set cut-off points of the Self-Care of Diabetes Inventory scales using glycated haemoglobin as outcome of interest. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a previous multicentre observational cross-sectional study was conducted. Overall, 540 adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus confirmed diagnosis were involved. Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected. Self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management were measured by the Self-Care of Diabetes Inventory. Linear regression models were performed to assess the relationship between self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management and glycated haemoglobin. Receiver operating characteristics curves were carried out to identify the best cut-off score for each self-care scale considering glycated haemoglobin >7% as outcome of interest. RESULTS: Self-care monitoring and self-care management were associated to glycated haemoglobin in both patients without (self-care monitoring p = 0.0008; self-care management p = 0.0178) and with insulin therapy (self-care monitoring p = 0.0007; self-care management p = 0.0224). Self-care maintenance was associated to glycated haemoglobin in patients without insulin therapy (p = 0.0118). Cut-off scores providing the best performance were 70 points for self-care maintenance and self-care monitoring, and 60 points for self-care management. CONCLUSIONS: Self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, and self-care management differently affect glycated haemoglobin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clinicians could implement tailored interventions to improve glycaemic control considering the lacking area of self-care.
Authors: Lindsay M Jaacks; Karen R Siegel; Unjali P Gujral; K M Venkat Narayan Journal: Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-05-28 Impact factor: 4.690
Authors: Margaret A Powers; Joan Bardsley; Marjorie Cypress; Paulina Duker; Martha M Funnell; Amy Hess Fischl; Melinda D Maryniuk; Linda Siminerio; Eva Vivian Journal: Clin Diabetes Date: 2016-04
Authors: Jay Visaria; Neeraj N Iyer; Amit Raval; Sheldon Kong; Todd Hobbs; Jonathan Bouchard; David M Kern; Vincent Willey Journal: Clin Ther Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 3.393
Authors: Maryam Tabesh; Jonathan E Shaw; Paul Z Zimmet; Stefan Söderberg; Digsu N Koye; Sudhir Kowlessur; Maryam Timol; Noorjehan Joonas; Ameena Sorefan; Praneel Gayan; K George M M Alberti; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Dianna J Magliano Journal: J Diabetes Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 4.006
Authors: Oliver Schnell; Hasan Alawi; Tadej Battelino; Antonio Ceriello; Peter Diem; Anne-Marie Felton; Wladyslaw Grzeszczak; Kari Harno; Peter Kempler; Ilhan Satman; Bruno Vergès Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2013-03-01