Qualitative study uncovers complex cultural, environmental, and literacy barriers to diabetes self-management in older adults, highlighting the need for culturally tailored interventions.
Effective self-management is crucial for older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), yet limited health literacy, socio-cultural factors, and resource constraints may hinder optimal care, especially in underserved regions. This study explored the lived experiences, barriers, and facilitators of diabetes self-management among older adults in Zabol, Iran. A qualitative descriptive design with an inductive, constructivist orientation was employed. Thirty-two older adults with T2DM (aged ≥ 60 years) were selected via purposive sampling with maximum variation from healthcare centers in Zabol. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted between February 2024 and August 2024. Data were analyzed using conventional content analysis following Graneheim and Lundman. Analysis revealed six major themes influencing diabetes self-management: (1) limited health literacy and communication barriers, compounded by hierarchical patient-provider power dynamics; (2) socioeconomic insecurity and food access challenges; (3) family dynamics and gender roles, including maternal altruism and limited emotional support; (4) cultural beliefs and fatalistic attitudes influencing adherence; (5) multimorbidity and physical limitations creating competing care demands; and (6) environmental and practical barriers, particularly harsh climatic conditions unique to Zabol. The findings extend existing qualitative evidence by describing how older adults in Zabol face a specific set of intersecting individual, cultural, and environmental barriers to diabetes self-management. Contextually responsive interventions addressing food insecurity, climatic barriers to physical activity, and hierarchical patient-provider dynamics are needed. Culturally tailored strategies may contribute to improved health outcomes in this vulnerable population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohabati et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: