Exploring the relationship between health knowledge, health literacy, self-care, self-efficacy, and glycemic control among adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Sasikala D Amirthalingam, Malanashita Ganeson, Chandramani Thuraisingham, Verna K M Lee, Chun Wai Chan, Lokman H Sulaiman, Sivarajan Ramasamy, Mohamad A Bujang, Cheong Lieng Teng
{"title":"Exploring the relationship between health knowledge, health literacy, self-care, self-efficacy, and glycemic control among adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.","authors":"Sasikala D Amirthalingam, Malanashita Ganeson, Chandramani Thuraisingham, Verna K M Lee, Chun Wai Chan, Lokman H Sulaiman, Sivarajan Ramasamy, Mohamad A Bujang, Cheong Lieng Teng","doi":"10.4239/wjd.v16.i9.105138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Malaysia continue to have substantial comorbidities and struggle to achieve glycemic targets.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To comprehensively evaluate diabetes self-care and glycemic control using multiple self-reporting questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adults diagnosed with T2DM attending the Seremban Health Clinic were recruited in this cross-sectional study. Eligible participants were recruited based on a consecutive sampling technique, first-come-first-served-basis if they fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In addition to the usual sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory data, the participants answered seven specific self-reporting questionnaires. This report was focused on six key variables: Glycemic control; self-care; self-efficacy; diabetes knowledge; health literacy; and medication adherence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100 adults with T2DM participated. The proportions of participants achieving specific thresholds in the key variables were: Acceptable glycemic control 39.4%; adequate diabetes knowledge 59.6%; sufficient or higher health literacy 80.2%; and medication adherence 51.0%. The mean self-efficacy score was 110.6 (73.3% of maximum), and the mean self-care score was 30.7 (43.9% of maximum). A statistically significant linear correlation was observed for eight pairs of key variables with Pearson's correlation values varying between 0.21 to 0.55. Self-efficacy had a relatively higher correlation while glycated hemoglobin was not correlated with other key variables. Path analysis was conducted to examine the relationships among diabetes self-efficacy (Diabetes Management Self Efficacy scale score), self-care behavior (Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities score), and glycemic control, but the model demonstrated a poor fit (<i>χ</i>² = 28.1, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found substantial suboptimal glycemic control and low self-care practices but acceptable levels of diabetes knowledge, self-efficacy, health literacy and medication adherence among the patients with T2DM. In spite of the correlations between self-care, self-efficacy, and medication adherence, it was surprising that self-care did not correlate with glycemic control. Prospective cohort studies are needed to explore whether these factors influence diabetes outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48607,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Diabetes","volume":"16 9","pages":"105138"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444297/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v16.i9.105138","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Malaysia continue to have substantial comorbidities and struggle to achieve glycemic targets.
Aim: To comprehensively evaluate diabetes self-care and glycemic control using multiple self-reporting questionnaires.
Methods: Adults diagnosed with T2DM attending the Seremban Health Clinic were recruited in this cross-sectional study. Eligible participants were recruited based on a consecutive sampling technique, first-come-first-served-basis if they fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In addition to the usual sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory data, the participants answered seven specific self-reporting questionnaires. This report was focused on six key variables: Glycemic control; self-care; self-efficacy; diabetes knowledge; health literacy; and medication adherence.
Results: A total of 100 adults with T2DM participated. The proportions of participants achieving specific thresholds in the key variables were: Acceptable glycemic control 39.4%; adequate diabetes knowledge 59.6%; sufficient or higher health literacy 80.2%; and medication adherence 51.0%. The mean self-efficacy score was 110.6 (73.3% of maximum), and the mean self-care score was 30.7 (43.9% of maximum). A statistically significant linear correlation was observed for eight pairs of key variables with Pearson's correlation values varying between 0.21 to 0.55. Self-efficacy had a relatively higher correlation while glycated hemoglobin was not correlated with other key variables. Path analysis was conducted to examine the relationships among diabetes self-efficacy (Diabetes Management Self Efficacy scale score), self-care behavior (Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities score), and glycemic control, but the model demonstrated a poor fit (χ² = 28.1, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: We found substantial suboptimal glycemic control and low self-care practices but acceptable levels of diabetes knowledge, self-efficacy, health literacy and medication adherence among the patients with T2DM. In spite of the correlations between self-care, self-efficacy, and medication adherence, it was surprising that self-care did not correlate with glycemic control. Prospective cohort studies are needed to explore whether these factors influence diabetes outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The WJD is a high-quality, peer reviewed, open-access journal. The primary task of WJD is to rapidly publish high-quality original articles, reviews, editorials, and case reports in the field of diabetes. In order to promote productive academic communication, the peer review process for the WJD is transparent; to this end, all published manuscripts are accompanied by the anonymized reviewers’ comments as well as the authors’ responses. The primary aims of the WJD are to improve diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive modalities and the skills of clinicians and to guide clinical practice in diabetes. Scope: Diabetes Complications, Experimental Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetes, Gestational, Diabetic Angiopathies, Diabetic Cardiomyopathies, Diabetic Coma, Diabetic Ketoacidosis, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Neuropathies, Donohue Syndrome, Fetal Macrosomia, and Prediabetic State.