Katherine J W Baucom1, Tali Bauman1, Yanina Nemirovsky1, Manuel Gutierrez Chavez1, Monique C Aguirre1, Carmen Ramos2, Anu Asnaani1, Cassidy A Gutner3, Natalie D Ritchie4,5, Megha Shah6, Lauren Clark7. 1. Department of Psychology, 14434University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 2. Department of Nutritional Sciences, 51329University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, 12259Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Office of Research, 47804Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA. 6. Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, 12239Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 7. School of Nursing, 8783University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe Lifestyle Coach perceptions of dyads (i.e., family members and/or friends) in the National Diabetes Prevention Program (NDPP). DESIGN: Qualitative evaluation of cross-sectional survey responses. SETTING: Online. PARTICIPANTS: Lifestyle Coaches (n=253) with experience teaching at least one in-person year-long NDPP cohort at a CDC-recognized organization. MEASURES: Survey included items on background and experience with dyadic approach, as well as open-ended items on the benefits and challenges observed when working with dyads in the NDPP. ANALYSIS: Lifestyle Coach background and experience were analyzed descriptively in SPSS. Open-ended responses were content coded in ATLAS.ti using qualitative description, and then grouped into categories. RESULTS: Most Lifestyle Coaches (n=210; 83.0%) reported experience delivering the NDPP to dyads. Benefits of a dyadic approach included having a partner in lifestyle change, superior outcomes and increased engagement, and positive "ripple effects." Challenges included difficult relationship dynamics, differences between dyad members, negative "ripple effects," and logistics. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle Coaches described a number of benefits, as well as some challenges, with a dyadic approach to the NDPP. Given the concordance between close others in lifestyle and other risk factors for type 2 diabetes, utilizing a dyadic approach in the NDPP has the potential to increase engagement, improve outcomes, and extend the reach of the program.
PURPOSE: To describe Lifestyle Coach perceptions of dyads (i.e., family members and/or friends) in the National Diabetes Prevention Program (NDPP). DESIGN: Qualitative evaluation of cross-sectional survey responses. SETTING: Online. PARTICIPANTS: Lifestyle Coaches (n=253) with experience teaching at least one in-person year-long NDPP cohort at a CDC-recognized organization. MEASURES: Survey included items on background and experience with dyadic approach, as well as open-ended items on the benefits and challenges observed when working with dyads in the NDPP. ANALYSIS: Lifestyle Coach background and experience were analyzed descriptively in SPSS. Open-ended responses were content coded in ATLAS.ti using qualitative description, and then grouped into categories. RESULTS: Most Lifestyle Coaches (n=210; 83.0%) reported experience delivering the NDPP to dyads. Benefits of a dyadic approach included having a partner in lifestyle change, superior outcomes and increased engagement, and positive "ripple effects." Challenges included difficult relationship dynamics, differences between dyad members, negative "ripple effects," and logistics. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle Coaches described a number of benefits, as well as some challenges, with a dyadic approach to the NDPP. Given the concordance between close others in lifestyle and other risk factors for type 2 diabetes, utilizing a dyadic approach in the NDPP has the potential to increase engagement, improve outcomes, and extend the reach of the program.
Entities:
Keywords:
diabetes prevention program; lifestyle intervention; qualitative; social context; social support
Authors: Elizabeth K Ely; Stephanie M Gruss; Elizabeth T Luman; Edward W Gregg; Mohammed K Ali; Kunthea Nhim; Deborah B Rolka; Ann L Albright Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 19.112