Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: To investigate the current status of diabetic self-management behavior and the factors influencing this behavior in Chengdu, a typical city in western China. METHODS: We performed stratified sampling in 6 urban districts of Chengdu. We used questionnaires concerning self-management knowledge, self-management beliefs, self-management efficacy, social support, and self-management behavior to investigate patients with T2DM from August to November 2011. All of the data were analyzed using the SPSS 17.0 statistical package. RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 364 patients in the present study. The median score of self-management behavior was 111.00, the interquartile range was 100.00-119.00, and the index score was 77.77. Self-management was described as "good" in 46%, "fair" in 45%, and "poor" in 6% of patients. A multiple-factor analysis identified age (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.91; P = 0.026), education in "foot care" (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.99; P = 0.048), self-management knowledge (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.92; P<0.001), self-management belief (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97; P = 0.002), self-efficacy (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96; P<0.001), and social support (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.94; P = 0.023) as positive factors. Negative factors included diabetes duration (5-9 years: OR, 14.82; 95% CI, 1.64-133.73; P = 0.016; and ≥10 years: OR, 10.28; 95% CI, 1.06-99.79; P = 0.045) and hospitalization experience (OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.64-5.36; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: We observed good self-management behavior in patients with T2DM in Chengdu. When self-management education is provided, age, education, knowledge, belief, self-efficacy, and social support should be considered to offer more appropriate intervention and to improve patients' behavior.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: