The impact of project diabetes with dignity intervention on knowledge and quality of life among adults with diabetes in a rural Indian setting

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
G. Nazar, M. Arora, Vinay K. Gupta, Tina Rawal, Aastha Chugh, Surbhi Shrivastava, P. Dhore, A. Bhatt, S. Deshpande, A. Unnikrishnan
{"title":"The impact of project diabetes with dignity intervention on knowledge and quality of life among adults with diabetes in a rural Indian setting","authors":"G. Nazar, M. Arora, Vinay K. Gupta, Tina Rawal, Aastha Chugh, Surbhi Shrivastava, P. Dhore, A. Bhatt, S. Deshpande, A. Unnikrishnan","doi":"10.4103/jncd.jncd_31_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Inadequate knowledge about diabetes leads to its under-diagnosis and sub-optimal control. We studied the impact of project diabetes with dignity (DWD) intervention on knowledge and quality of life (QoL) among adults with diabetes in a rural Indian setting. Methods: DWD was a community-based, quasi-experimental trial conducted with 416 participants (30–70 years) with diabetes across two Primary Health Centers (one intervention; one control) in Western India, over a year. The intervention involved monthly home visits, patient/caregiver, and community-based awareness-raising activities by trained accredited social health activists (ASHAs) workers. Differences in changes in knowledge about: Diabetes, symptoms, management, and complications, and QoL between participants in the intervention versus control areas, from baseline to end-line, were assessed using a questionnaire and analyzed via mixed-effects regression models. Results: About 52% of patients belonged to the intervention group. There was a significant increase in knowledge about diagnosis/management among participants in intervention group (31.48% [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.52–38.43] to 59.55% [52.52–66.58]) versus a decline in the control group (40.73% [33.40–48.07] to 27.95% [19.40–34.50]) (P < 0.001). Similar improvements in intervention group were observed for knowledge about symptoms/complications of diabetes. For QoL, percentage of patients having some self-care problems showed a higher decline in intervention group (29.46% to 6.98%) versus control group (4.85% to 3.55%) (P = 0.005). Reduction in anxiety/depression was significant in the intervention versus control group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: DWD was effective in improving QoL and diabetes knowledge which are key to prevent disease progression/complications in the intervention compared to the control group. Capacity-building of community health workers such as ASHAs, for the prevention and management of diabetes in rural settings, is recommended.","PeriodicalId":52935,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Noncommunicable Diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Noncommunicable Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jncd.jncd_31_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Inadequate knowledge about diabetes leads to its under-diagnosis and sub-optimal control. We studied the impact of project diabetes with dignity (DWD) intervention on knowledge and quality of life (QoL) among adults with diabetes in a rural Indian setting. Methods: DWD was a community-based, quasi-experimental trial conducted with 416 participants (30–70 years) with diabetes across two Primary Health Centers (one intervention; one control) in Western India, over a year. The intervention involved monthly home visits, patient/caregiver, and community-based awareness-raising activities by trained accredited social health activists (ASHAs) workers. Differences in changes in knowledge about: Diabetes, symptoms, management, and complications, and QoL between participants in the intervention versus control areas, from baseline to end-line, were assessed using a questionnaire and analyzed via mixed-effects regression models. Results: About 52% of patients belonged to the intervention group. There was a significant increase in knowledge about diagnosis/management among participants in intervention group (31.48% [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.52–38.43] to 59.55% [52.52–66.58]) versus a decline in the control group (40.73% [33.40–48.07] to 27.95% [19.40–34.50]) (P < 0.001). Similar improvements in intervention group were observed for knowledge about symptoms/complications of diabetes. For QoL, percentage of patients having some self-care problems showed a higher decline in intervention group (29.46% to 6.98%) versus control group (4.85% to 3.55%) (P = 0.005). Reduction in anxiety/depression was significant in the intervention versus control group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: DWD was effective in improving QoL and diabetes knowledge which are key to prevent disease progression/complications in the intervention compared to the control group. Capacity-building of community health workers such as ASHAs, for the prevention and management of diabetes in rural settings, is recommended.
糖尿病尊严干预项目对印度农村成人糖尿病患者知识和生活质量的影响
目的:对糖尿病认识不足,导致糖尿病诊断不足,控制不理想。我们研究了有尊严的糖尿病项目(DWD)干预对印度农村糖尿病成年人知识和生活质量(QoL)的影响。方法:DWD是一项基于社区的准实验性试验,在印度西部的两个初级卫生中心(一个干预中心;一个对照中心)对416名糖尿病患者(30-70岁)进行了为期一年的试验。干预措施包括每月家访、患者/护理人员以及由经过培训的合格社会卫生活动家(ASHA)工作人员开展的社区宣传活动。从基线到终点,干预组和对照组参与者在糖尿病、症状、管理和并发症以及生活质量方面的知识变化差异使用问卷进行评估,并通过混合效应回归模型进行分析。结果:约52%的患者属于干预组。干预组参与者对诊断/管理的了解显著增加(31.48%[95%置信区间(CI)24.52–38.43]至59.55%[52.52–66.58]),而对照组则有所下降(40.73%[33.40–48.07]至27.95%[19.40–34.50])(P<0.001)糖尿病对于QoL,干预组(29.46%至6.98%)与对照组(4.85%至3.55%)相比,有一些自我护理问题的患者比例下降更高(P=0.005)。干预组与对照组相比,焦虑/抑郁的减少非常显著(P<0.001)。结论:DWD能有效提高生活质量和糖尿病知识,这是预防疾病的关键与对照组相比,干预中的进展/并发症。建议对ASHA等社区卫生工作者进行能力建设,以便在农村环境中预防和管理糖尿病。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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