'We are in control of this thing, and we know what to do now': Pilot and process evaluation of 'Diabetes Together', a couples-focused intervention to support self-management of Type 2 Diabetes in South Africa.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Global Public Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-11 DOI:10.1080/17441692.2024.2386979
Lucy Lynch, Myrna van Pinxteren, Peter Delobelle, Naomi Levitt, Buyelwa Majikela-Dlangamandla, Kate Greenwell, Nuala McGrath
{"title":"'We are in control of this thing, and we know what to do now': Pilot and process evaluation of 'Diabetes Together', a couples-focused intervention to support self-management of Type 2 Diabetes in South Africa.","authors":"Lucy Lynch, Myrna van Pinxteren, Peter Delobelle, Naomi Levitt, Buyelwa Majikela-Dlangamandla, Kate Greenwell, Nuala McGrath","doi":"10.1080/17441692.2024.2386979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We piloted the delivery of a prototype couples-focused intervention, 'Diabetes Together' with 14 people living with diabetes (PLWD) and their partners, in Cape Town, South Africa in 2022. We aimed to: assess feasibility of recruiting couples in this setting; explore acceptability of intervention materials and changes needed; and investigate whether our prespecified logic model captured how the intervention may work. We used questionnaires, interviews and focus groups after each workshop and after couples completed counselling. We conducted a process evaluation to identify intervention modifications and used inductive thematic analysis to explore whether the data supported our logic model. Twelve of the 14 couples completed the second workshop and 2 couples completed two counselling sessions post-workshop. Feedback showed participants appreciated the intervention and limited improvements were made. Thematic analysis identified four main themes: (1) involving partners matters; (2) group work supports solidarity with other couples; (3) improving communication between partners is crucial; and (4) taking part helped couples to take control of diabetes. Data suggested the logic model should explicitly acknowledge the importance of group education and of equalising partners' knowledge. This pilot suggests that 'Diabetes Together' increased knowledge and skills within couples and could facilitate improved, collaborative self-management of diabetes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12735,"journal":{"name":"Global Public Health","volume":"19 1","pages":"2386979"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2386979","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We piloted the delivery of a prototype couples-focused intervention, 'Diabetes Together' with 14 people living with diabetes (PLWD) and their partners, in Cape Town, South Africa in 2022. We aimed to: assess feasibility of recruiting couples in this setting; explore acceptability of intervention materials and changes needed; and investigate whether our prespecified logic model captured how the intervention may work. We used questionnaires, interviews and focus groups after each workshop and after couples completed counselling. We conducted a process evaluation to identify intervention modifications and used inductive thematic analysis to explore whether the data supported our logic model. Twelve of the 14 couples completed the second workshop and 2 couples completed two counselling sessions post-workshop. Feedback showed participants appreciated the intervention and limited improvements were made. Thematic analysis identified four main themes: (1) involving partners matters; (2) group work supports solidarity with other couples; (3) improving communication between partners is crucial; and (4) taking part helped couples to take control of diabetes. Data suggested the logic model should explicitly acknowledge the importance of group education and of equalising partners' knowledge. This pilot suggests that 'Diabetes Together' increased knowledge and skills within couples and could facilitate improved, collaborative self-management of diabetes.

我们能控制病情,我们知道现在该做什么":在南非,"携手糖尿病 "是一项以夫妻为重点的干预措施,旨在支持 2 型糖尿病患者的自我管理。
2022 年,我们在南非开普敦对 14 名糖尿病患者(PLWD)及其伴侣试行了以夫妇为中心的干预原型 "糖尿病携手"。我们的目标是:评估在这种情况下招募夫妇的可行性;探索干预材料的可接受性和所需的改变;调查我们预先设定的逻辑模型是否捕捉到了干预如何发挥作用。我们在每次研讨会后和夫妇完成咨询后使用了调查问卷、访谈和焦点小组。我们进行了过程评估,以确定干预措施的修改,并使用归纳式主题分析来探讨数据是否支持我们的逻辑模型。14 对夫妇中有 12 对完成了第二次工作坊,2 对在工作坊后完成了两次咨询。反馈显示,参与者对干预措施表示赞赏,并做出了有限的改进。主题分析确定了四个主要主题:(1)伴侣的参与很重要;(2)小组工作有助于与其他伴侣团结一致;(3)改善伴侣之间的沟通至关重要;以及(4)参与工作有助于伴侣控制糖尿病。数据表明,逻辑模型应明确承认小组教育和平等伙伴知识的重要性。该试点项目表明,"糖尿病携手共治 "提高了夫妻双方的知识和技能,有助于改善糖尿病的自我管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Public Health
Global Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Global Public Health is an essential peer-reviewed journal that energetically engages with key public health issues that have come to the fore in the global environment — mounting inequalities between rich and poor; the globalization of trade; new patterns of travel and migration; epidemics of newly-emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the increase in chronic illnesses; escalating pressure on public health infrastructures around the world; and the growing range and scale of conflict situations, terrorist threats, environmental pressures, natural and human-made disasters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信