Marcus Heise1, Astrid Fink2, Jens Baumert3, Christin Heidemann3, Yong Du3, Thomas Frese1, Solveig Carmienke1. 1. Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany. 2. Institute of Medical Sociology, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Few studies on diabetes self-management considered the patterns and relationships of different self-management behaviours (SMB). The aims of the present study are 1) to identify patterns of SMB among persons with diabetes, 2) to identify sociodemographic and disease-related predictors of SMB among persons with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The present analysis includes data of 1,466 persons (age 18 to 99 years; 44.0% female; 56.0% male) with diabetes (type I and II) from the population-based study German Health Update 2014/2015 (GEDA 2014/2015-EHIS). We used latent class analysis in order to distinguish different patterns of self-management behaviours among persons with diabetes. The assessment of SMB was based on seven self-reported activities by respondents (dietary plan, diabetes-diary, diabetes health pass, self-assessment of blood glucose, self-examination of feet, retinopathy-screenings and assessment of HbA1c). Subsequent multinomial latent variable regressions identified factors that were associated with self-management behaviour. RESULTS: Latent class analysis suggested a distinction between three patterns of SMB. Based on modal posterior probabilities 42.8% of respondents showed an adherent pattern of diabetes self-management with above-average frequency in all seven indicators of SMB. 32.1% showed a nonadherent pattern with a below-average commitment in all seven forms of SMB. Another 25.1% were assigned to an ambivalent type, which showed to be adherent with regard to retinopathy screenings, foot examinations, and the assessment of HbA1c, yet nonadherent with regard to all other forms of SMB. In multivariable regression analyses, participation in Diabetes Self-Management Education programs (DSME) was the most important predictor of good self-management behaviour (marginal effect = 51.7 percentage points), followed by attentiveness towards one's personal health (31.0 percentage points). Respondents with a duration of illness of less than 10 years (19.5 percentage points), employed respondents (7.5 percentage points), as well as respondents with a high socioeconomic status (24.7 percentage points) were more likely to show suboptimal forms of diabetes self-management. DISCUSSION: In the present nationwide population-based study, a large proportion of persons with diabetes showed suboptimal self-management behaviour. Participation in a DSME program was the strongest predictor of good self-management. Results underline the need for continual and consistent health education for patients with diabetes.
OBJECTIVE: Few studies on diabetes self-management considered the patterns and relationships of different self-management behaviours (SMB). The aims of the present study are 1) to identify patterns of SMB among persons with diabetes, 2) to identify sociodemographic and disease-related predictors of SMB among persons with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The present analysis includes data of 1,466 persons (age 18 to 99 years; 44.0% female; 56.0% male) with diabetes (type I and II) from the population-based study German Health Update 2014/2015 (GEDA 2014/2015-EHIS). We used latent class analysis in order to distinguish different patterns of self-management behaviours among persons with diabetes. The assessment of SMB was based on seven self-reported activities by respondents (dietary plan, diabetes-diary, diabetes health pass, self-assessment of blood glucose, self-examination of feet, retinopathy-screenings and assessment of HbA1c). Subsequent multinomial latent variable regressions identified factors that were associated with self-management behaviour. RESULTS: Latent class analysis suggested a distinction between three patterns of SMB. Based on modal posterior probabilities 42.8% of respondents showed an adherent pattern of diabetes self-management with above-average frequency in all seven indicators of SMB. 32.1% showed a nonadherent pattern with a below-average commitment in all seven forms of SMB. Another 25.1% were assigned to an ambivalent type, which showed to be adherent with regard to retinopathy screenings, foot examinations, and the assessment of HbA1c, yet nonadherent with regard to all other forms of SMB. In multivariable regression analyses, participation in Diabetes Self-Management Education programs (DSME) was the most important predictor of good self-management behaviour (marginal effect = 51.7 percentage points), followed by attentiveness towards one's personal health (31.0 percentage points). Respondents with a duration of illness of less than 10 years (19.5 percentage points), employed respondents (7.5 percentage points), as well as respondents with a high socioeconomic status (24.7 percentage points) were more likely to show suboptimal forms of diabetes self-management. DISCUSSION: In the present nationwide population-based study, a large proportion of persons with diabetes showed suboptimal self-management behaviour. Participation in a DSME program was the strongest predictor of good self-management. Results underline the need for continual and consistent health education for patients with diabetes.
Authors: Jennifer M Rohan; Alan Delamater; Jennifer Shroff Pendley; Lawrence Dolan; Grafton Reeves; Dennis Drotar Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2011-03-29 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: David C Klonoff; Lawrence Blonde; George Cembrowski; Antonio Roberto Chacra; Guillaume Charpentier; Stephen Colagiuri; George Dailey; Robert A Gabbay; Lutz Heinemann; David Kerr; Antonio Nicolucci; William Polonsky; Oliver Schnell; Robert Vigersky; Jean-François Yale Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2011-11-01
Authors: C Lange; J D Finger; J Allen; S Born; J Hoebel; R Kuhnert; S Müters; J Thelen; P Schmich; M Varga; E von der Lippe; M Wetzstein; T Ziese Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2017-09-18