| Literature DB >> 33807339 |
Ana María Salinas Martínez1,2, Ruth Isabel Gómez Campusano1,3, Hid Felizardo Cordero Franco2, Karen Abigail Chávez Barrón2, Cecilia Janeth Gutiérrez Sauceda2, Francisco Javier Guzmán de la Garza2,4, Georgina Mayela Núñez Rocha1.
Abstract
Few studies have considered more than one behavior, despite the tendency towards multiple behaviors, and there are none that have focused on a Latino population. We determined the concurrence of four unhealthy behaviors related to glycemic control and identified common cognitive factors at advanced stages of readiness for change in patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care. A cross-sectional study was carried out during August-December 2018 in northeastern Mexico. We consecutively included patients between 20 and 70 years who were without medical contraindication, physical impediment against exercise, pregnancy and edentulism, among other selection criteria (n = 407). Stages of behavior were measured according to the Transtheoretical Model. Pros, cons, self-efficacy, susceptibility, and severity data were collected by interview. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression. A total of 36.7% exhibited more than one unhealthy behavior in precontemplation or contemplation (no interest or some interest in changing consumption of refined sugars and saturated fats, exercise, or oral hygiene behavior). Cons (p < 0.05) and self-efficacy (p < 0.001) were common to all four unhealthy behaviors, independent of potential confounders. Studies like ours facilitate the recognition of individuals with multiple unhealthy behaviors who share equivalent profiles of readiness for change before implementing public health programs.Entities:
Keywords: diabetes; health behavior; stages of change; transtheoretical Model
Year: 2021 PMID: 33807339 PMCID: PMC8037007 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18073631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Sociodemographic and family profile in patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care (n = 406).
| Characteristic | Frequency |
|---|---|
| Sex, female | 65% |
| Highest educational level | |
| None | 3.9% |
| Primary | 35.5% |
| Secondary | 30.3% |
| Preparatory or Technical | 21.2% |
| College or Postgraduate | 9.1% |
| Occupation | |
| Housewife | 49.3% |
| Employee/self-employed | 30.6% |
| Retired | 19.2% |
| Unemployed | 1.0% |
| Marital status, with partner | 76.6% |
| Family background | |
| ≥1 family member has complications of diabetes | 64.8% |
| ≥1 family member tries to avoid foods high in fats or sugars | 71.9% |
| ≥1 family member tries to exercise | 64.8% |
| ≥1 family member visits the dentist annually for revision | 69.5% |
Stages of readiness for change in four unhealthy behaviors, patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care (n = 406).
| Stage of Readiness for Change | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P | C | P + C (Early) | A | M | A + M (Late) | |
| Food high in saturated fat | Consumption ≥ once a week | Consumption never or <once a week | ||||
| Interest in reducing frequency, portion size or change to light product | Time with this frequency | |||||
| No | Yes | <6 months | ≥6 months | |||
| Fried or breaded food | 11.9% | 25.4% | 37.3% | 7.7% | 55.1% | 62.8% |
| Whole milk | 10.3% | 23.6% | 33.9% | 4.7% | 61.3% | 66.0% |
| Bacon or menudo (tripe) | 9.9% | 15.1% | 25.0% | 11.4% | 63.7% | 75.1% |
| Whole milk cheese or cream cheese | 9.9% | 17.0% | 26.9% | 10.1% | 63.1% | 73.2% |
| Red meat fat or chicken skin | 5.7% | 12.6% | 18.3% | 10.1% | 71.7% | 81.8% |
| Global, saturated fat | 6.9% | 16.7% | 23.6% | 8.4% | 68.0% | 76.4% |
|
| ||||||
| Sugary sodas | 8.6% | 30.0% | 38.6% | 7.9% | 54.0% | 61.9% |
| Pastries | 8.9% | 25.0% | 33.9% | 7.9% | 58.0% | 65.9% |
| Sandwich cookies | 5.2% | 13.0% | 18.2% | 8.9% | 73.0% | 81.9% |
| Coffee or sugary fruit drinks | 4.7% | 14.0% | 18.7% | 3.5% | 78.0% | 81.5% |
| Global refined sugars | 5.7% | 22.4% | 28.1% | 5.4% | 66.5% | 71.9% |
| Tooth brushing | Never or < twice a day | ≥Twice a day | ||||
| Interest in increasing frequency | Time with this frequency | |||||
| No | Yes | <6 months | ≥6 months | |||
| 4.7% | 13.3% | 18.0% | 1.5% | 80.5% | 82.0% | |
| Exercise | Never, moderate <150′ or intense <75′ a week | Moderate ≥150′ or intense ≥ 75′ a week | ||||
| Interest in starting/ increasing the frequency | Time with this frequency | |||||
| No | Yes | <6 months | ≥6 months | |||
| 24.2% | 30.6% | 54.8% | 7.9% | 37.3% | 45.2% | |
P = Precontemplation, C = Contemplation, A = Action, M = Maintenance.
Figure 1Mean and 95% confidence intervals of perception of pros, cons, and self-efficacy, patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care (n = 406) (the higher the score, the greater the perception). P = Precontemplation, C = Contemplation, A = Action, M = Maintenance.
Logistic regression analysis of cognitive factors and late stage of the behavior, patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care (n = 406).
| Action or Maintenance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumption of Refined Sugars | Consumption of Saturated Fats | Exercise | Tooth Brushing | |
| Crude odds ratio (95% confidence interval) | ||||
| Pros | 1.4 (1.1, 1.9) * | 1.7 (1.3, 2.3) *** | 1.6 (1.1, 2.1) *** | n.s. |
| Cons | 0.5 (0.4, 0.7) *** | 0.5 (0.3, 0.7) *** | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) *** | 0.1 (0.1, 0.2) *** |
| Self-efficacy | 2.3 (1.7, 3.2) *** | 3.1 (2.1, 4.6) *** | 2.4 (1.9, 3.0) *** | 4.5 (3.0, 6.7) *** |
| Adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) | ||||
| Pros | n.s. | 1.4 (1.1, 2.0) *,a,c | n.s. | n.s. |
| Cons | 0.6 (0.4, 0.9) *,a,b | 0.6 (0.4, 0.9) *,a,c | 0.3 (0.2, 0.5) ***,a,d | 0.2 (0.1, 0.3) ***,a,e |
| Self-efficacy | 2.2 (1.6, 3.1) ***,a,b | 2.8 (1.8, 4.4) **,a,c | 2.0 (1.5, 2.5) ***,a,d | 2.4 (1.4, 4.0) **,a,e |
a The model was adjusted by sex, age, marital status, educational level, occupation, hypertension and/or dyslipidemia, family member with complications of diabetes, time since diabetes diagnosis, type of treatment, and self-reporting of glucose level; b The model also included ≥1 Family member tries to avoid foods high in refined sugars; c The model also included ≥1 Family member tries to avoid foods high in saturated fats; d The model also included ≥1 Family member tries to exercise; e The model also included ≥1 Family member visits the dentist annually for revision and patient visited the dentist for a checkup last year. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. n.s. = not significant.