| Literature DB >> 35139832 |
Negar Shahabi1, Mitra Kolivand2, Nader Salari3, Parvin Abbasi4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telenursing facilitates access to efficient care and acceptance and compliance with treatment at home. Given wide complications of lack of compliance with treatment in causing complications and progression of diabetes and role of the family in attending the patient, this study aimed to investigate the effect of telenursing training based on family-centered empowerment pattern on compliance with diet regimen in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2.Entities:
Keywords: Compliance; Diabetes type 2; Family-centered empowerment pattern; Randomized clinical trial; Telenursing
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35139832 PMCID: PMC8830007 DOI: 10.1186/s12902-022-00953-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Endocr Disord ISSN: 1472-6823 Impact factor: 2.763
Fig. 1Consort flow diagram of the study
Comparison of demographic information of two intervention and control groups
| Variable | Dimensions | Intervention group. n (%) | Control group n (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 14 (51.9) | 13 (48.1) | 0.50a |
| Female | 16 (48.5) | 17 (51.5) | ||
| Education | Under diploma | 8 (50) | 8 (50) | 0.50b |
| Diploma and Associate Degree | 13 (48.1) | 4 (51.9) | ||
| Bachelor’s degree and MA | 9 (52.9) | 8 (50) | ||
| Job | Housewife | 8 (50) | 8 (50) | 0.95b |
| Employee | 13 (48.1) | 14 (51.9) | ||
| Other | 9 (52.9) | 8 (47.1) | ||
| Income (million Tomans) | < 1.5 | 17 (51.5) | 16 (48.5) | 0.80b |
| 1.5-2.5 | 5 (41.7) | 7 (58.3) | ||
| > 2.5 | 8 (53.3) | 7 (46.7) | ||
| Marital Status | Single | 8 (47.1) | 8 (52.9) | 0.77a |
| Married | 22 (51.2) | 21 (48.8) | ||
| Age | Mean ± SD | 45.9 ± 7.1 | 42.6 ± 6.8 | 0.07c |
| BMI | Mean ± SD | 28.8 ± 3.4 | 28.2 ± 3.5 | 0.18d |
| The years of having diabetes | Mean ± SD | 4.1 ± 1.6 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 0.39c |
P.value significant at P < 0.05
SD Standard deviation
aYates Correction Test
bChi-Squared test
cIndependent t-test
dMann-Whitney U
Mean and standard deviation of the variables in the control and intervention groups before and after the intervention
| Variables | Stages | Mean ± SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | Control group | |||
| making effort for treatment | Before intervention | 25.7 ± 3.7 | 25.5 ± 4.4 | 0.76a |
| After intervention | 43.5 ± 3.07 | 26.9 ± 5.3 | 0.001a | |
| 0.001 b | 0.18 c | – | ||
| intention to take the treatment | Before intervention | 17.57 ± 3.14 | 17.3 ± 3.34 | 0.75b |
| After intervention | 31.97 ± 2.58 | 17.17 ± 3.01 | 0.001b | |
| 0.001 b | 0.84 b | – | ||
| adaptability | Before intervention | 19.7 ± 2.5 | 20.6 ± 2.3 | 0.16a |
| After intervention | 30.3 ± 3.9 | 19.5 ± 2.5 | 0.001a | |
| 0.001 c | 0.14 c | – | ||
| integrating illness into life | Before intervention | 16.2 ± 2.4 | 16.5 ± 4.5 | 0.75a |
| After intervention | 21.8 ± 2.3 | 16 ± 2.9 | 0.001a | |
| 0.001 c | 0.61 b | – | ||
| stick to the treatment | Before intervention | 11.6 ± 2.45 | 11.4 ± 2.26 | 0.70d |
| After intervention | 16.4 ± 2.6 | 11.43 ± 2.48 | 0.001d | |
| 0.001 b | 0.94 b | – | ||
| commitment to treatment | Before intervention | 16.8 ± 3.3 | 16.7 ± 2.8 | 0.90a |
| After intervention | 20.4 ± 5.5 | 16.8 ± 2.7 | 0.001d | |
| 0.003 c | 0.68 c | – | ||
| indecisiveness for applying treatment | Before intervention | 12.53 ± 2.01 | 12.5 ± 2.04 | 0.95d |
| After intervention | 15.13 ± 2.08 | 13.20 ± 2.29 | 0.001a | |
| 0.001 c | 0.05 b | – | ||
| compliance | Before intervention | 120.5 ± 6.8 | 120.6 ± 10.6 | 0.97a |
| After intervention | 179.7 ± 9.6 | 120.5 ± 8.2 | 0.001a | |
| 0.001 b | 0.96 b | – | ||
P.value significant at P < 0.05
SD Standard deviation
aMann-Whitney U
bPaired-samples t-test
cWilcoxon Test
dIndependent t-test
Distribution of partial and absolute frequency of compliance in intervention and control groups before and after intervention
| Variables | Stage | Dimensions | Intervention group | Control group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| compliance | Before intervention | Weak | – | – |
| Mean | 2 (66.7) | 18 (60) | ||
| Good | 10 (33.3) | 12 (40) | ||
| Very Good | – | – | ||
| After intervention | Weak | – | – | |
| Mean | – | 19 (63.3) | ||
| Good | 23 (76.7) | 11 (36.7) | ||
| Very Good | 7 (23.3) |