{"title":"Review: Diabetes self-care management practices among insulin-taking patients.","authors":"Jonathan Clough","doi":"10.1177/1744987118782319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although set in Jordan, this exploration of diabetes self-care management (DSCM) practices utilising the ‘40 Item Diabetes Self-Management Scale’ (Gharaibeh et al., 2017) emphasises to us that DSCM could be improved in all insulin-taking patients, wherever they are. I return to this point later. Furthermore, as well as the identified predictors of DSCM, such as education and training, age, etc., cultural barriers are also recognised as potentially being responsible for poorer levels of DSCM, particularly in the case of Jordanian females. This of course resonates with current knowledge that diabetes education and care need to be culturally appropriate in order to be effective in improving DSCM (Creamer et al., 2016). The results from the authors’ research clearly indicated that in the sample group the patients with type 1 diabetes demonstrated a higher level of DSCM than those with type 2 diabetes and queried why this might be so, postulating that, since many of the type 2 diabetics were also on oral hypoglycaemic medication, the burden of diabetes might thus have been higher. However, it is also reported that two-thirds of the sample group were on both insulin and oral hypoglycaemics, so some of the type 1 diabetics were also on oral hypoglycaemics. This caused me to wonder whether this group of type 1s showed similar characteristics of DSCM to the type 2 patients. This is not made clear in the reviewed study, and could help clarify the distinction between DSCM in type 1 and 2 diabetics – that additional medication alters DSCM in type 1 and 2, or that it is just that type 2 diabetics have poorer levels of DSCM? This of course leads us to question just why this is so. Another area that could have been further explored regarding the differences between DSCM in type 1 and 2 diabetes concerns age. It is known that as patients age their DSCM declines, which the reviewed study also demonstrates. However, it would have been useful to compare patient ages between the two types of diabetes. Type 1 diabetes tends to occur earlier in life, whereas type 2 tends to occur later. This might help explain why the type 2 diabetics had reduced levels of DSCM, since as a group they would more likely be older, although this is not clear within the paper.","PeriodicalId":171309,"journal":{"name":"Journal of research in nursing : JRN","volume":" ","pages":"566-567"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1744987118782319","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of research in nursing : JRN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987118782319","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/7/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Although set in Jordan, this exploration of diabetes self-care management (DSCM) practices utilising the ‘40 Item Diabetes Self-Management Scale’ (Gharaibeh et al., 2017) emphasises to us that DSCM could be improved in all insulin-taking patients, wherever they are. I return to this point later. Furthermore, as well as the identified predictors of DSCM, such as education and training, age, etc., cultural barriers are also recognised as potentially being responsible for poorer levels of DSCM, particularly in the case of Jordanian females. This of course resonates with current knowledge that diabetes education and care need to be culturally appropriate in order to be effective in improving DSCM (Creamer et al., 2016). The results from the authors’ research clearly indicated that in the sample group the patients with type 1 diabetes demonstrated a higher level of DSCM than those with type 2 diabetes and queried why this might be so, postulating that, since many of the type 2 diabetics were also on oral hypoglycaemic medication, the burden of diabetes might thus have been higher. However, it is also reported that two-thirds of the sample group were on both insulin and oral hypoglycaemics, so some of the type 1 diabetics were also on oral hypoglycaemics. This caused me to wonder whether this group of type 1s showed similar characteristics of DSCM to the type 2 patients. This is not made clear in the reviewed study, and could help clarify the distinction between DSCM in type 1 and 2 diabetics – that additional medication alters DSCM in type 1 and 2, or that it is just that type 2 diabetics have poorer levels of DSCM? This of course leads us to question just why this is so. Another area that could have been further explored regarding the differences between DSCM in type 1 and 2 diabetes concerns age. It is known that as patients age their DSCM declines, which the reviewed study also demonstrates. However, it would have been useful to compare patient ages between the two types of diabetes. Type 1 diabetes tends to occur earlier in life, whereas type 2 tends to occur later. This might help explain why the type 2 diabetics had reduced levels of DSCM, since as a group they would more likely be older, although this is not clear within the paper.