Suppr超能文献

糖尿病教育者实施的动机性访谈:是否能改善控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病患者的血糖控制?

Motivational interviewing delivered by diabetes educators: does it improve blood glucose control among poorly controlled type 2 diabetes patients?

机构信息

Department of Behavioral Medicine Research, Baystate Medical Center, 140 High Street, Room 2104, Springfield, MA 01105, United States.

出版信息

Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011 Jan;91(1):54-60. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.09.036. Epub 2010 Nov 13.

Abstract

AIM

To determine whether glycemic control is improved when motivational interviewing (MI), a patient-centered behavior change strategy, is used with diabetes self management education (DSME) as compared to DSME alone.

METHODS

poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients (n=234) were randomized into 4 groups: MI+DSME or DSME alone, with or without use of a computerized summary of patient self management barriers. We compared HbA1c changes between groups at 6 months and investigated mediators of HbA1c change.

RESULTS

study patients attended the majority of the four intervention visits (mean 3.4), but drop-out rate was high at follow-up research visits (35%). Multiple regression showed that groups receiving MI had a mean change in HbA1c that was significantly lower (less improved) than those not receiving MI (t=2.10; p=0.037). Mediators of HbA1c change for the total group were diabetes self-care behaviors and diabetes distress; no between-group differences were found.

CONCLUSIONS

DSME improved blood glucose control, underlining its benefit for T2DM management. However, MI+DSME was less effective than DSME alone. Overall, weak support was found for the clinical utility of MI in the management of T2DM delivered by diabetes educators.

摘要

目的

确定与单纯糖尿病自我管理教育(DSME)相比,使用以患者为中心的行为改变策略——动机性访谈(MI)是否会改善血糖控制。

方法

将 234 名血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者随机分为 4 组:MI+DSME 或单纯 DSME,是否使用患者自我管理障碍的计算机总结。我们比较了 6 个月时各组的 HbA1c 变化,并研究了 HbA1c 变化的中介因素。

结果

研究患者参加了大部分四次干预访问(平均 3.4 次),但在随访研究访问时失访率很高(35%)。多元回归显示,接受 MI 的组的 HbA1c 变化平均值明显较低(改善程度较低),低于未接受 MI 的组(t=2.10;p=0.037)。HbA1c 变化的总体中介因素是糖尿病自我护理行为和糖尿病困扰;未发现组间差异。

结论

DSME 改善了血糖控制,强调了其对 T2DM 管理的益处。然而,MI+DSME 不如单纯的 DSME 有效。总体而言,对糖尿病教育者提供的 T2DM 管理中 MI 的临床实用性的支持很弱。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/00a7/3011053/2f125ac69547/nihms253171f1.jpg

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
A Simulation Study of Mediated Effect Measures.中介效应测量的模拟研究
Multivariate Behav Res. 1995 Jan 1;30(1):41. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3001_3.
2
Standards of medical care in diabetes--2008.2008年糖尿病医疗护理标准
Diabetes Care. 2008 Jan;31 Suppl 1:S12-54. doi: 10.2337/dc08-S012.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验