Effect of structured individual and combined education on blood glucose regulation in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Zarif Cagla Arslan, Sabah Tuzun, Can Öner, Nazli Haciağaoğlu, Hüseyin Çetin, Engin Ersin Şimşek
{"title":"Effect of structured individual and combined education on blood glucose regulation in type 2 diabetes mellitus.","authors":"Zarif Cagla Arslan, Sabah Tuzun, Can Öner, Nazli Haciağaoğlu, Hüseyin Çetin, Engin Ersin Şimşek","doi":"10.1093/her/cyae029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although various approaches have been used in diabetes self-management education (DSME) programs, the effect of DSME programs on glycemic control is controversial. This study aimed to compare the effects of structured individual education and combined education on glycemic regulation in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study included T2DM patients who applied to the Ust Kaynarca Diabetes Center between 1 January 2018 and 11 March 2020. All data were retrospectively evaluated from hospital information systems. Patients who received only individual education were defined as the individual education group (IEG), and patients who received both individual and group education were defined as the combined education group (CEG). A total of 496 T2DM patients, with 248 (50.0%) in the IEG and 248 (50.0%) in the CEG, were included in the study. The change in HbA1c (ΔHbA1c) value for the IEG was 1.0% (2.5%), while the ΔHbA1c value for the CEG was 1.9% (2.8%) (P < 0.001). When factors affecting the glycemic control were evaluated, it was determined that the type of education [odds ratio (OR) = 2.295, P < 0.001], gender (OR = 1.799, P = 0.007), presence of hyperlipidemia (OR = 0.559, P = 0.032) and presence of medications added to treatment (OR = 1.558, P = 0.041) were effective on glycemic control. Combined education, in which individual and group education are conducted together, is more effective than individual education in glucose regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48236,"journal":{"name":"Health Education Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyae029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although various approaches have been used in diabetes self-management education (DSME) programs, the effect of DSME programs on glycemic control is controversial. This study aimed to compare the effects of structured individual education and combined education on glycemic regulation in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study included T2DM patients who applied to the Ust Kaynarca Diabetes Center between 1 January 2018 and 11 March 2020. All data were retrospectively evaluated from hospital information systems. Patients who received only individual education were defined as the individual education group (IEG), and patients who received both individual and group education were defined as the combined education group (CEG). A total of 496 T2DM patients, with 248 (50.0%) in the IEG and 248 (50.0%) in the CEG, were included in the study. The change in HbA1c (ΔHbA1c) value for the IEG was 1.0% (2.5%), while the ΔHbA1c value for the CEG was 1.9% (2.8%) (P < 0.001). When factors affecting the glycemic control were evaluated, it was determined that the type of education [odds ratio (OR) = 2.295, P < 0.001], gender (OR = 1.799, P = 0.007), presence of hyperlipidemia (OR = 0.559, P = 0.032) and presence of medications added to treatment (OR = 1.558, P = 0.041) were effective on glycemic control. Combined education, in which individual and group education are conducted together, is more effective than individual education in glucose regulation.

结构化个人教育和联合教育对 2 型糖尿病患者血糖调节的影响。
尽管糖尿病自我管理教育(DSME)项目采用了多种方法,但DSME项目对血糖控制的影响仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较结构化个体教育和联合教育对 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者血糖调节的影响。本研究纳入了2018年1月1日至2020年3月11日期间向Ust Kaynarca糖尿病中心提出申请的T2DM患者。所有数据均通过医院信息系统进行回顾性评估。仅接受个人教育的患者被定义为个人教育组(IEG),同时接受个人教育和集体教育的患者被定义为联合教育组(CEG)。研究共纳入了 496 例 T2DM 患者,其中 248 例(50.0%)属于 IEG,248 例(50.0%)属于 CEG。IEG 的 HbA1c (ΔHbA1c) 变化值为 1.0% (2.5%),而 CEG 的 HbA1c 变化值为 1.9% (2.8%)。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Publishing original, refereed papers, Health Education Research deals with all the vital issues involved in health education and promotion worldwide - providing a valuable link between the health education research and practice communities.
×
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