The impact of provision of self-monitoring of blood glucose supplies on self-care activities among patients with uncontrolled Type 2 diabetes mellitus: A prospective study

Determinants of diabetes self-care activities in patients with type 2 diabetes based on self-determination theory

AIMS

In type 2 diabetes control, self-management is an effective way to minimize the risk of developing complications and improve the quality of life. Self-determination theory (SDT) proposed a promising explanatory framework to predict self-regulated behavior which was particularly relevant for self-management. This study aimed to investigate whether SDT constructs can affect the self-management and controlling glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in type 2 diabetic patients or not.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted from August to December 2022 at two diabetes clinics in Zahedan. The study included 300 patients with type 2 diabetes. Data collection was done using a researcher-administrated questionnaire that included demographic data, diabetes self-care activities, and self-determination constructs including autonomous support, autonomous motivation, and perceived competence.

RESULTS

The mean of the overall score of self-care activities was 34.62 ± 11.86 out of a maximum of 70. Patients in the fourth quarter (wealthiest) of the socioeconomic status had the highest mean self-care score (P = 0.003). There was a significant relationship between diet score with perceived competence (P = 0.009). Perceived competence (P<0.001) and controlled self-regulation (P<0.001) were the predictors of exercise score in diabetes patients. Independent self-regulation (P<0.001, r = 0.21) and overall self-regulation (P = 0.001, r = 0.19) were significantly related to blood-glucose testing score. There was a significant relationship between foot care score with perceived competence (P = 0.048, r = 0.11) and autonomous support (P = 0.013, r = 0.14). Multiple regression showed that exercise was the predictor of HbA1c (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Exercise is crucial for achieving good individualized glycemic control and reducing the risk of diabetes complications. The findings provided valuable insights into the determinants of self-care activities in patients with type 2 diabetes and underscore the need for interventions that address socioeconomic disparities, enhance perceived competence, and provide autonomy support to improve diabetes self-care.

Treatment self-regulation questionnaire across three self-care behaviours: An instrument validation study in Iranian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aim

The study aimed at testing the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the treatment self‐regulation questionnaire (TSRQ‐15) across healthy diet, exercise and medication‐use/glucose‐monitoring among Iranian people with type‐2 diabetes.

Design

Cross‐sectional design.

Methods

Content validity was investigated by 16 experts. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were employed. Construct validity, convergent/discriminant validity and internal consistency were examined. Concurrent validity was assessed using Spearman's rho correlation across different behaviours.

Results

Content validity was confirmed for Persian TSRQ‐15. A three‐factor structure was revealed, in which external regulation and introjected regulations were validated, while amotivation and autonomous failed to show discriminant validity. Internal consistency was sound, and concurrent validity was approved. The Persian version of TSRQ‐15 was shown to be a valid and reliable tool for assessing motivation behind the practice of healthy diet, exercise and medication‐use/glucose‐monitoring in people with type 2 diabetes.

Factors Related to Diabetes Self-Management Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Chinese Cross-Sectional Survey Based on Self-Determination Theory and Social Support Theory

PURPOSE

Self-management behavior (SMB) plays a significant role in glycemic control. This study aimed to explore the factors related to SMB among patients with type 2 diabetes and how these factors interacted with each other.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were recruited from 18 community healthcare stations (CHSs) from six community healthcare centers (CHCs) in Beijing, China from April to May in 2017. Motivation, competence, autonomy support, social support, self-management skills, adherence to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement were tested by questionnaire. Correlation analysis and path analysis were performed so as to identify the factors associated with patients' SMB.

RESULTS

A total of 532 participants completed this study. Participants who have good compliance to SMBG got higher scores in social support (F = 7.68, p = 0.01), competence (F = 10.47, p = 0.01), and skills (F = 12.34, p < 0.01). Higher competence (β = 0.03, P < 0.001), higher social support (β = 0.01, P < 0.001), better skills(β = 0.01, P < 0.001) directly led to better adherence to SMBG. Social support had a positive effect on autonomy support (β = 0.69, P < 0.001), motivation (β = 0.45, P < 0.001), competence (β = 0.28, P < 0.001), skills (β = 0.14, P < 0.001), which was also indirectly linked to better adherence to SMBG. Better self-management skills directly led to better adherence to HbA1c measurement (β = 0.03, P < 0.001). Social support had a positive effect on autonomy support (β = 0.69, P < 0.001), motivation (β = 0.45, P < 0.001), competence (β = 0.28, P < 0.001), skills (β = 0.14, P < 0.001), which was also indirectly linked to better adherence to HbA1c measurement.

CONCLUSION

Self-determination theory and social support theory were practical in explaining SMB in Chinese population. Competence, motivation and social support played an important role in diabetic self-management. Paying attention to the promotion of individual's intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy may be able to help patients maintain self-management behavior in the long-term routine.

Process- and Outcome-Based Financial Incentives to Improve Self-Management and Glycemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes in Singapore: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Sub-optimally controlled diabetes increases risks for adverse and costly complications. Self-management including glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and exercise are key for optimal glycemic control, yet, poor self-management remains common.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of the Trial to Incentivize Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD) study was to determine the effectiveness of financial incentives in improving glycemic control among type 2 diabetes patients in Singapore, and to test whether process-based incentives tied to glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and physical activity are more effective than outcome-based incentives tied to achieving normal glucose readings.

METHODS

TRIAD is a randomized, controlled, multi-center superiority trial. A total of 240 participants who had at least one recent glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) being 8.0% or more and on oral diabetes medication were recruited from two polyclinics. They were block-randomized (blocking factor: current vs. new glucometer users) into the usual care plus (UC +) arm, process-based incentive arm, and outcome-based incentive arm in a 2:3:3 ratio. The primary outcome was the mean change in HbA1c at month 6 and was linearly regressed on binary variables indicating the intervention arms, baseline HbA1c levels, a binary variable indicating titration change, and other baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Our findings show that the combined incentive arms trended toward better HbA1c than UC + , but the difference is estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.67 to 0.06). Lending credibility to this result, the proportion of participants who reduced their HbA1c is higher in the combined incentive arms relative to UC + (0.18; 95% CI 0.04, 0.31). We found a small improvement in process- relative to outcome-based incentives, but this was again estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.05; 95% CI - 0.42 to 0.31). Consistent with this improvement, process-based incentives were more effective at improving weekly medication adherent days (0.64; 95% CI - 0.04 to 1.32), weekly physically active days (1.37; 95% CI 0.60-2.13), and quality of life (0.04; 95% CI 0.0-0.07) than outcome-based incentives.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that both incentive types may be part of a successful self-management strategy. Process-based incentives can improve adherence to intermediary outcomes, while outcome-based incentives focus on glycemic control and are simpler to administer.