Living with diabetes: a group-based self-management support programme for T2DM patients in the early phases of illness and their partners, study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

Anne L van Puffelen, Mieke Rijken, Monique J W M Heijmans, Giel Nijpels, Guy E H M Rutten, François G Schellevis, Anne L van Puffelen, Mieke Rijken, Monique J W M Heijmans, Giel Nijpels, Guy E H M Rutten, François G Schellevis

Abstract

Background: The present article presents the protocol for a randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a group-based self-management support programme for recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients (one to three years post-diagnosis) and their partners. The course aims to support T2DM patients and their partners in successfully integrating diabetes care into their daily lives and hereby enhance self-management and diabetes-specific health-related quality of life. The content of the course is based on the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM). Furthermore, principles from the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and social support theories are integrated.

Methods/design: We aim to recruit 160 recently diagnosed T2DM patients and their partners from general practices in six different regions in the Netherlands. Patients need to be diagnosed with T2DM for one to three years and have to experience some degree of diabetes-related difficulties, as measured with a three-item screener. Participating patients and their partners are randomly allocated to the intervention or control condition. Participants in the intervention condition receive three monthly group sessions and a booster session three months later. Participants in the control condition receive a single information meeting. Data will be collected at baseline (T0), directly after the programme (T1) and six months post-programme (T2), including: self-management, diabetes-specific health-related quality of life, illness perceptions, attitudes, social support and empowerment. A three-level multilevel model will be used to compare change-scores between the conditions (intervention/control) on each outcome.

Discussion: Our study will be the first to determine whether a group-based support programme based on the CSM is effective in enhancing self-management and diabetes-specific health-related quality of life in recently diagnosed T2DM patients. The important role of patients' partners in effective diabetes care is also acknowledged in the study.

Trial registration: Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR) NTR3302.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Theoretical model of the programme.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow of participants.

References

    1. International Diabetes F. The IDF Diabetes Atlas. Fifth Edition. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2012.
    1. Solli O, Stavem K, Kristiansen IS. Health-related quality of life in diabetes: the associations of complications with EQ-5D scores. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;14:18. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-18.
    1. Kovacs BK, Nicolucci A, Holt RIG, Willaing I, Hermanns N, Kalra S, Wens J, Pouwer F, Skovlund SE, Peyrot M. the DAWN2 Study Group. Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs second study (DAWN2): cross-national benchmarking indicators for family members living with people with diabetes. Diabet Med. 2013;14:778–788. doi: 10.1111/dme.12239.
    1. American Diabetes A. Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. In 2012. Diabetes Care. 2013;14:1033–1046.
    1. King P, Peacock I, Donnelly R. The UK prospective diabetes study (UKPDS): clinical and therapeutic implications for type 2 diabetes. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;14:643–648.
    1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Quality of life in type 2 diabetic patients is affected by complications but not by intensive policies to improve blood glucose or blood pressure control (UKPDS 37). U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Diabetes Care. 1999;14:1125–1136.
    1. Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Quality of life and diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 1999;14:205–218. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-7560(199905/06)15:3<205::AID-DMRR29>;2-O.
    1. Gray A, Raikou M, McGuire A, Fenn P, Stevens R, Cull C, Stratton I, Adler A, Holman R, Turner R. he United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Cost effectiveness of an intensive blood glucose control policy in patients with type 2 diabetes: economic analysis alongside randomised controlled trial (UKPDS 41). United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. BMJ. 2000;14:1373–1378. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7246.1373.
    1. Glasgow RE, Eakin EG. In: The Handbook of Behaviour Change. Shumaker SA, Schron EB, Ockene JK, McBee WL, editor. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1998. Issues in Diabetes Self-Management; pp. 435–461.
    1. Ahola AJ, Groop PH. Barriers to self-management of diabetes. Diabet Med. 2013;14:413–420. doi: 10.1111/dme.12105.
    1. Steed L, Cooke D, Newman S. A systematic review of psychosocial outcomes following education, self-management and psychological interventions in diabetes mellitus. Patient Educ Couns. 2003;14:5–15. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00213-6.
    1. Whittemore R. Behavioral interventions for diabetes self-management. Nurs Clin North Am. 2006;14:641–654. doi: 10.1016/j.cnur.2006.07.014.
    1. Harvey JN, Lawson VL. The importance of health belief models in determining self-care behaviour in diabetes. Diabet Med. 2009;14:5–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02628.x.
    1. Thoolen B, de Ridder D, Bensing J, Gorter K, Rutten G. No worries, no impact? A systematic review of emotional, cognitive and behavioral responses to the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. Health Psychol Rev. 2008;14:65–93. doi: 10.1080/17437190802311361.
    1. Cameron LD, Leventhal H. The Self-Regulation of Health and Illness Behavior. London: Routlegde; 2003.
    1. Leventhal H, Meyer D, Nerenz DR. In: Contributions to Medical Psychology. Rachman S, editor. New York: Pergamon Press; 1980. The Common-Sense Representation of Illness Danger; pp. 17–30.
    1. Leventhal H, Nerenz DR, Steele DJ. In: Handbook of Psychology and Health. Baum A, Taylor SE, Singer JE, editor. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum; 1984. Illness Representations and Coping with Health Threats; pp. 219–252.
    1. Hagger MS, Orbell S. A meta-analytic review of the common-sense model of illness representations. Psychol Health. 2003;14:141–184. doi: 10.1080/088704403100081321.
    1. Petrie KJ, Cameron LD, Ellis CJ, Buick D, Weinman J. Changing illness perceptions after myocardial infarction: an early intervention randomized controlled trial. Psychosom Med. 2002;14:580–586.
    1. Moss-Morris R, Humphrey K, Johnson MH, Petrie KJ. Patients’ perceptions of their pain condition across a multidisciplinary pain management program: do they change and if so does it matter? Clin J Pain. 2007;14:558–564. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318093fcab.
    1. Keogh KM, Smith SM, White P, McGilloway S, Kelly A, Gibney J, O'Dowd T. Psychological family intervention for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Am J Manag Care. 2011;14:105–113.
    1. Searle A, Norman P, Thompson R, Vedhara K. Illness representations among patients with type 2 diabetes and their partners: relationships with self-management behaviors. J Psychosom Res. 2007;14:175–184. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.02.006.
    1. van Dam HA, van der Horst FG, Knoops L, Ryckman RM, Crebolder HF, van den Borne BH. Social support in diabetes: a systematic review of controlled intervention studies. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;14:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.11.001.
    1. Figueiras MJ, Weinman J. Do similar patients and spouse perceptions of myocardial infarction predict recovery? Psychol Health. 2003;14:201–216. doi: 10.1080/0887044021000057266.
    1. Heijmans M, De Ridder DTD, Bensing J. Dissimilarity in patients’ and spouses’ representations of chronic illness: exploration of relations to patient adaptation. Psychol Health. 1999;14:451–466. doi: 10.1080/08870449908407340.
    1. Snoek FJ, Hogenelst MH. Psychological implications of diabetes mellitus. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2008;14:2395–2399.
    1. Carey MP, Jorgensen RS, Weinstock RS, Sprafkin RP, Lantinga LJ, Carnrike CL Jr, Baker MT, Meisler AW. Reliability and validity of the appraisal of diabetes scale. J Behav Med. 1991;14:43–51. doi: 10.1007/BF00844767.
    1. Moss-Morris R, Weinman J, Petrie KJ, Horne R, Cameron LD, Buick D. The Revised Illness Perceptions Questionnaire (IPQ-R) Psychol Health. 2002;14:1–16. doi: 10.1080/08870440290001494.
    1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;14:191–215.
    1. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986.
    1. Thoits PA. Social Support: Theory, Research and Applications. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff; 1985. Social Support and Psychological Well-Being: theoretical Possibilities; pp. 51–72.
    1. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer; 1984.
    1. Schwarzer R, Leppin A. Social support and health. A theoretical and empirical overview. J Soc Pers Relat. 1991;14:99–127. doi: 10.1177/0265407591081005.
    1. Keogh KM, White P, Smith SM, McGilloway S, O’Dowd T, Gibney J. Changing illness perceptions in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, a randomised controlled trial of a family-based intervention: protocol and pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2007;14:36. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-8-36.
    1. Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;14:943–950. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.7.943.
    1. Snoek FJ, Pouwer F, Welch GW, Polonsky WH. Diabetes-related emotional distress in Dutch and U.S. diabetic patients: cross-cultural validity of the problem areas in diabetes scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;14:1305–1309. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.9.1305.
    1. Welch GW, Jacobson AM, Polonsky WH. The problem areas in diabetes scale. An evaluation of its clinical utility. Diabetes Care. 1997;14:760–766. doi: 10.2337/diacare.20.5.760.
    1. Welch GW, Weiniger K, Anderson B, Polonsky WH. Responsiveness of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) questionnaire. Diabet Med. 2003;14:69–72. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2003.00832.x.
    1. Anderson RM, Fitzgerald JT, Funnell MM, Gruppen LD. The third version of the diabetes attitude scale. Diabetes Care. 1998;14:1403–1407. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.9.1403.
    1. Buunk BP, Berkhuysen MA, Sanderman RA, Nieuwland W, Ranchor AV. Actieve betrokkenheid, beschermend bufferen en overbescherming (Active engagement, protective buffering and overprotection) Gedrag en Gezondheid. 1996;14:304–313.
    1. Buysse H, De Moor G, Coorevits P, Van Maele G, Kaufman J, Ruige J. Main characteristics of type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients interested in the use of the telemonitoring platform. J Nurs Healthc Chronic Illn. 2011;14:456–468. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-9824.2011.01120.x.
    1. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;14:582–592.
    1. Steinsbekk A, Rygg LO, Lisulo M, Rise MB, Fretheim A. Group based diabetes self-management education compared to routine treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic review with meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;14:213. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-213.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir