van Dam Henk A, van der Horst Frans G, Knoops Lut, Ryckman Richard M, Crebolder Harry F J M, van den Borne Bart H W
Maastricht University, Department of General Practice, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Oct;59(1):1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.11.001. Epub 2004 Dec 29.
Systematic, computerized search in Medline, the Cochrane Library, Eric, PsychINFO and Embase files, 1980-2003, selecting descriptions of prospective intervention trials with good methodological design, testing effects of social support interventions on health outcomes in primary and outpatient care for type 2 diabetes. Six controlled trials were reviewed. They defined, modified, and measured social support in various ways, and scored outcomes with varying measures. Gender differences and the right amount of support seem important. Promising new forms of social support: group consultations (better HbA1c and lifestyle), Internet or telephone-based peer support (improved perceived support, increased physical activity, respectively), and social support groups (improved knowledge and psychosocial functioning). No improved diabetes control by classic forms of support, e.g. from spouse (but weight loss in women) and family and friends (no differences). It is tentatively concluded that this review supports the hypothesis that specific social support interventions affect patient self-care and diabetes outcomes. New forms of social support may be discussed and incorporated in the work of diabetes teams, and offered to patients as new possibilities to help them adjust to a life with (type 2) diabetes and make information-based decisions. Only in the group consultations study, diabetes control was protected. More well-designed research testing the effects of specific social support interventions on patient self-care, lifestyle adaptations, and outcomes of diabetes care, is warranted.
1980年至2003年期间,在医学文献数据库(Medline)、考科蓝图书馆、教育资源信息中心(Eric)、心理学文摘数据库(PsychINFO)和荷兰医学文摘数据库(Embase)中进行了系统的计算机检索,筛选出方法设计良好的前瞻性干预试验描述,这些试验旨在测试社会支持干预对2型糖尿病初级和门诊护理中健康结局的影响。共审查了六项对照试验。它们以各种方式定义、修改和衡量社会支持,并采用不同的方法对结局进行评分。性别差异和适当的支持量似乎很重要。有前景的新型社会支持形式包括:小组咨询(改善糖化血红蛋白和生活方式)、基于互联网或电话的同伴支持(分别改善感知到的支持、增加身体活动)以及社会支持小组(改善知识和心理社会功能)。传统形式的支持,如配偶提供的支持(但女性体重减轻)以及家人和朋友提供的支持(无差异),并未改善糖尿病控制情况。初步得出结论,本综述支持特定社会支持干预会影响患者自我护理和糖尿病结局这一假设。可以讨论新型社会支持形式并将其纳入糖尿病团队的工作中,并作为新的可能性提供给患者,以帮助他们适应(2型)糖尿病生活并做出基于信息的决策。只有在小组咨询研究中,糖尿病控制得到了改善。有必要开展更多设计良好的研究,以测试特定社会支持干预对患者自我护理、生活方式调整和糖尿病护理结局的影响。