Effect of Educational Intervention Programme on the Health- Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) of Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in South-east, Nigeria.

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2118064/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Effect of Educational Intervention Programme on the Health- Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) of Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in South-east, Nigeria.

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2118064/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 07 Apr, 2023

Read the published version in BMC Endocrine Disorders →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

Diabetes is one of the most important chronic diseases that have a great impact on health as people with diabetes are constantly being reminded of their disease daily; they have to eat carefully, exercise and test their blood glucose. They often feel challenged by their disease because of its day-to-day management demands and these affect their quality of life. The study aimed at determining the effect of an educational intervention program on the quality of life of Individuals with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in South East, Nigeria.

Methods

A quasi-experimental controlled study involving three hundred and eighty-two (382) type 2 DM persons recruited from the tertiary health institutions in South East, Nigeria, and randomly assigned to intervention and control groups respectively. Data was collected from the diabetic clinics of the health institutions using the SF – 36 questionnaires. Pretest data collection was done, thereafter, education on self-care was given to the intervention group. After a 6months follow-up, post-test data were collected from both groups. Analysis was done using an Independent t-test, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), Paired Samples Test, and Spearman rank order correlation at 0.05 alpha level.

Results

The control group indicated significantly higher mean HRQOL scores in most domains of the HRQOL before intervention (t = -1.927 to -6.072, p < 0.05). However, 6 months after the intervention, the mean HRQOL scores of the intervention group increased significantly in all the domains of HRQOL (p < 0.05). Also, the overall mean HRQOL score of the intervention group increased significantly by 5.87point after intervention (64.72 ± 10.96 vs 58.85 ± 15.23; t = 4.349. p = 0.001). Age was inversely correlated with some domains of HRQOL; as age increases, HRQOL decreases in those domains. Gender had no significant influence on HRQOL.

Conclusion

Educational intervention was very effective in improving HRQOL in individuals with type 2 DM. Hence, it is recommended for inclusion in all diabetes care plans.

Type 2 Diabetes

T2DM

HRQOL

educational intervention

self-management education

Quasi-experimental

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a metabolic disorder known to affect people of all ages and racial backgrounds. It has been acclaimed as one of the major health challenges ravaging the global community [1]. In the past, it was known to affect the affluent more than the non-affluent but in the contemporary periods, its effect is being felt significantly in developing countries [2]. The previous report has shown that as high as 80% of diabetes-related deaths were recorded in low and middle-income countries [1].

Interestingly, previous studies have reported a progressive increase in the prevalence of diabetes both at global, regional, and national levels [4, 3, 5, 1]. In 2011, it was estimated that 285 million adults were affected with DM globally [4]. Also, in 2013, another report had it that about 382 million adults globally were affected by DM with a prevalence of 3.8%. In 2014, the global prevalence rose to 9% with an estimated 387 million adults living with diabetes [5]. A report from a previous study revealed that nearly half a billion adults globally were estimated to be living with diabetes [6]. A previous study reported the prevalence of diabetes in Nigeria to be within the region of 8% − 10% with over 4 million cases as reported by another study [7, 4]. Because of the rising global prevalence of diabetes associated with poor quality of life, the WHO projected that diabetes may become the 7th leading cause of death by 2030 [8].

It has been posited that diabetes mellitus often results in frequent hospital hospitalization which is associated with high economic costs, and consequently affects the quality of life of persons with diabetes [9]. Hence, attention to strategies such as patient training and education to promote quality of life is critical to reducing early complications and readmissions of patients with chronic diseases such as diabetes.

The QOL represents the effect of illness on a person as perceived by the person [1, 4]. Quality of life also encompasses people's emotional, social and physical well-being and their ability to function in the ordinary [10]. From the perceptive of the WHO, the QOL of an individual is perceived as their position in life in the context of the culture and value system in which they live and about their goal, expectations, standards, and concerns [11]. The perception of the meaning of QOL varies from one individual to another, and from one group to another group. These differences in the definition stem from the multi-disciplinary use of the term. Hence, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) explained QOL to mean a broad multidimensional concept that usually includes subjective evaluation of both positive and negative aspects of life [12]. However, HRQOL is put in context when the QOL is considered concerning the impact on Health and Disease [12]. Health-Related Quality of Life is a health outcome that quantifies how disease, disability, or disorder affects an individual's wellbeing. [13, 12]. According to the WHO, HRQL is measured in the dimensions of physical, mental, and social well-being of an individual [14].

Diabetes is one of the most important chronic diseases that have a great impact on health. People with diabetes are constantly being reminded of their disease daily; they have to choose their diet as well as decide when to schedule their meals, they also have to exercise, test their blood glucose, take their medication, monitor their blood pressure, check for symptoms of hyper or hypoglycemia as well as deal with the fear of the possibility of complications. As a result, they often feel challenged by their disease because of its day-to-day management demands and these may affect their quality of life. Diabetes education is concerned with encouraging independence and self-confidence so that people carry out their self-care activities. Knowledge of self-management of diabetes is an important aspect for better glycemic control and better quality of life. The aim is to enable the patient to become the most knowledgeable and hopefully the most active participant in his or her diabetes care [15]. It also aims at optimizing metabolic control, preventing acute and chronic complications, and improving quality of life [16]. However, previous studies on self-care practice revealed that persons with DM have inadequate knowledge of self-care [17, 18]. This, the researchers assumed may affect their HRQOL. We realized that there was a dearth of studies on non-pharmacological interventions in the care of people with type 2 diabetes in Nigeria, especially in the South Eastern part. This has therefore created a knowledge gap that needs to be filled hence our desire to find an answer to the research question ‘what will be the effect of the educational intervention on the patients who present with type 2 diabetes in some selected tertiary health institutions in South East Nigeria. We hereby hypothesized that an educational intervention program on the HRQOL of individuals with type 2 DM recruited from selected tertiary institutions in South East, Nigeria will not lead to an improvement in their HRQOL. We believe that the success of incorporation of educational intervention in the management of type 2 DM will go a long way in minimizing the development of comorbidities and drug intervention in diabetic patients hence improving the HRQOL of individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Study Design

The study was a multi-center quasi-experimental design involving three hundred and eighty-two (382) persons with type 2 DM purposively recruited from the diabetic clinics of four tertiary health institutions in South East, Nigeria. Ethics approval to carry out the research was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of Nnamdi Azikiwe Teaching Hospital University, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, and Federal Medical Center, Umuahia.

Step 1. Selection of Study Area/States used for the study - There are five (5) States that make up the South Eastern Region of Nigeria. Each State houses two tertiary health institutions making a total of ten (10) tertiary health institutions in South Eastern, Nigeria. These States with their tertiary health institutions were listed and a simple random technique with replacement was used to select four (4) States with their tertiary health institutions. The technique involved writing the name of each state on a piece of paper, folded and placed in a bag, a child was asked to pick from the bag one piece of paper at a time. The state picked was written down, and the piece of paper was folded and put back in the bag. This procedure was repeated until four States were selected. The States selected were: Abia, Anambra, Enugu, and Imo States

Step 2: Selection of Study center/ site – Simple random technique was used to select a health institution from each state that making a total of four (4) tertiary health institutions that were used for the study. The institutions are Federal Medical Center, Umuahia, (FMCU), Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital, Nnewi, (NAUTHN), University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Ituku-Ozalla, (UNTHI), and Federal Medical Center, Owerri (FMCO).

Step 3: Determination of Experimental (Intervention) and Comparison (Control) groups – Participating tertiary health institutions were assigned to experimental and control groups by randomly assigning each to experimental and comparison (control) health institutions using simple randomization with replacement. This was achieved by writing numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 on a piece of paper, folded, and placed in a tray. Four girls, (each representing a health institution) were asked to pick a piece of paper from the tray. Odd numbers formed experimental hospitals while even numbers form comparison (control) hospitals. The institutions picked for experimental were UNTH Ituku-Ozalla and FMC Owerri, whereas NAUTH Nnewi and FMC Umuahia were picked as control hospitals. Hence, participants from UNTH Ituku-Ozalla and FMC Owerri formed the experimental (intervention) group while those from NAUTH Nnewi and FMC Umuahia formed the control (comparison) group. The Original sample population for the study was 410. A proportionate sampling technique was used to determine the number of participants recruited from each study site based on the proportion of DM persons from each site to the entire population of DM persons from the 4 hospitals selected for the study. Thus, experimental hospitals which were UNTH Enugu and FMC Owerri had 121 & 86 respectively. DM persons respectively, total = 207. Control hospitals which were NAUTH Nnewi and FMC, Owerri had 103 & 100 DM persons respectively, making a total of 203 DM persons for the control group. However, before the intervention, it was observed that some copies of the questionnaire (9 from the experimental & 10 from the control group) were not properly filled/completed. Also, during the post-test, 9 participants from the control group did not show up, as a result, their pretest scores were removed. In total, we recorded attrition of 28 out of the 410. So the analysis of the questionnaire was based on 198 experimental participants' scores and 184 control participants' scores.

Step 4 Finally, a purposive sampling technique was used in recruiting participants for the study. The researcher met the diabetic persons at the diabetic clinics in the selected health institutions (Experimental and Control health institutions) on different occasions, after introducing the purpose of the study and the steps/procedures involved to them, those that opted for the study and who met the inclusion criteria were recruited. Their names and phone numbers or support persons’ phone contact were collected.

Patient Education- Educational intervention covered areas such as meaning, types, causes, complications of DM, adherence to diet therapy, blood glucose monitoring, physical activity/exercise, foot care, adherence to medication, recognition of symptoms of hypo and hyperglycemia, and actions to take, blood pressure monitoring, regular health checkups on eye care, health care use, 3-monthly laboratory test for glycosylated hemoglobin (HbAic), communication with the physician, lifestyle changes, managing emotional problems as well as stress management.

Method Of Data Collection

Research Assistants

Six research assistants (final year student nurses) trained by the researchers assisted in data collection from the selected health institutions. All the research assistants received training on the areas they were to assist in the study. Each item in the questionnaire was explained to them and the need to maintain objectivity was emphasized. The training of research assistants lasted for two weeks.

The study participants were shared into groups of not more than 25persons/group for easy administration of the questionnaire as well as education of intervention group participants. Each group of study participants was invited to the clinic on a particular day in the week for pre-intervention data collection. Pretest data were collected from study participants (both experimental and control group) who met the inclusion criteria, using both the English and Igbo versions of the questionnaire. Pretest data collection lasted for 6weeks

Educational intervention

Educational intervention material centered on general diabetes management such as involvement in physical activity/exercise, diet adherence, foot care, monitoring of blood sugar, blood pressure monitoring, recognition of signs of hypo and hyperglycemia and actions to take, and eye checkups. Other areas covered include lifestyle changes (avoidance of intake of alcohol/sweetened wine, cigarette smoking, etc.), involvement in healthy social functions (joining the diabetic club, etc.) health care use (even in the absence of symptoms), communication with physician, lifestyle changes, emotional and stress management.

The diabetes self-management education commenced for the experimental group and lasted for 9weeks. An unpublished booklet titled “Managing Your Diabetes” developed by the researchers from a module on diabetes education and other relevant materials was given to the experimental group to go home with. The experimental group was followed up, two weekly meetings were arranged with them to emphasize more on diabetes self-management and also encouraged them to practice self-management. Phone calls were made between meetings to answer the participant's questions. Also, the two weekly meetings helped the researchers to be having contact with the experimental participants to identify the areas they were having a problem with the practice of self-care. The control group participants received normal care during the period of intervention. After six months of commencement of training with follow-up, copies of the questionnaire on quality of life were administered as a posttest to both the experimental and control groups to observe the effect of the education on the quality of life of the intervention (experimental) group.

At the end of the post-test data collection activities, the researchers educated the participants in the control group and gave each of them a copy of the educational material as means of support.

An instrument for data collection: Data was collected using the Rand Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey. SF-36 questionnaire has a total of 36 questions with eight (8) scales that measure 8 dimensions (domains) of an individual’s health. Each scale contains specific questions that assess the quality of life in that domain. The domains are: Physical functioning contains ten (10) questions, Role limitation due to physical health (4 questions), Role limitation due to emotional problem (3 questions), Energy/Fatigue (4 questions), Emotional wellbeing (5 questions), Social functioning (2 questions), Pain (2 questions) and General health (6 questions).

The above domains of the HRQOL were further grouped into two components viz: the physical and the mental components. Scoring of SF – 36 questionnaires was done using RAND Scoring guide. All questions were scored on a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 representing the highest level of functioning possible. Aggregate scores were compiled as a percentage of the total points possible, using the RAND scoring table. The scores from those questions that addressed each specific area of functional health status were averaged together, for a final score within each of the dimensions measured. The scores were entered into SPSS for statistical analysis.

Method of data analyses:

An Independent t-test was used to compare the baseline QOL scores between the experimental and control groups before the intervention. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) test statistics was used to compare the changes that occurred in HRQOL between the experimental and control groups 6-months post-intervention. Paired samples test was used to examine the changes that occurred between the components of HRQOL. Spearman rank order correlation was used to test the relationship between age and HRQOL domains. T-test was used to test the association between gender and the domains of the HRQOL in all tests, p-value less than 0.05 alpha levels were considered significant.

Table 1 shows that the comparison of the number of both male and female participants was matched. They were not statistically significant p= > 0.256

Table 2 shows that both groups had similar proportions of participants across gender. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding gender. The mean age of participants in the experimental group (58.52 ± 11.40, t = 1.87) was similar to that of the control group (56.29 ± 11.92, t = 1.86, p = 0.063).

Table 3: shows the mean and standard deviation of quality of life scores of the experimental and control groups before educational intervention. Independent t-test result shows significantly higher mean QOL scores in the control group prior to intervention in the following domains: Energy/fatigue (57.03±17.20 vs 51.60±14.15; t = -3.379, p = 0.001), Emotional wellbeing (67.64±16.02 vs 59.19±12.96; t = -5.690, p = 0.001), Social functioning (62.96±21.37 vs 58.33±20.09; -2.187, p = 0.029), and General Health (56.95±16.66 vs 47.75±12.85; t = -6.072, p = 0.001). The table further shows differences in overall QOL between the groups; the control group had a significantly higher overall QOL mean score than the experimental group before intervention (56.51±16.44 vs 52.02±15.02, t = -2.792, p = 0.006).

Table.4 shows a comparison of quality of life scores between experimental and control groups before and after the educational intervention. Before intervention, the control group had significantly higher QOL mean scores than the experimental group in the following QOL domains: energy/fatigue (57.02 ±17.20 vs 51.60 ± 14.15, p = 0.001), emotional wellbeing (67.64 ± 16.02 vs 59.19 ± 12.96, p = 0.001), social functioning (62.96 ± 21.37 vs 58.33 ± 20.09, p = 0.029), general health (47.75 ± 12.85 v s56.95 ± 16.66, t = -6.072, p = 0.001). However, 6-months after the intervention, the experimental group made significantly better improvements in all QOL domains compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Also, the overall QOL mean score of the experimental group was observed to be significantly higher by 5.87 than the control group after the intervention (p = 0.001).

Table 5 further showed significant differences in the QOL mean score of the physical and mental components 6-months post-intervention. The physical component QOL mean increased by 9.12points higher than the pretest QOL mean, while the mental component QOL mean increased by 6.3points higher than the pretest QOL mean, thus indicating the effectiveness of the intervention on both components of QOL although the effect was more on the physical component (t = -14.51) than the mental component (t = -10.82).

Table 6 shows an inverse correlation between age and the following domains of HRQOL: Physical functioning (ɤ = -.175, p = 0.001), role limitation due to physical health (ɤ = -.219, p = 0.001), energy/fatigue (ɤ = -.102, P = 0.047), Pain (ɤ = -.117, P = 0.022). As age increases, QOL decreases in the above-mentioned domains.

Table 7. shows no significant relationship between gender and QOL (p ˃ 0.05).

The baseline findings on HRQOL revealed that a good number of the study participants scored above 50 in most domains of QOL at the pretest except in role limitation due to physical health in which more than half of all participants scored below 50. This finding concurs with a previous finding which reported QOL scores of more than 50 in most domains of the SF – 36 measurements [19]. HRQOL between the two groups before intervention showed fewer proportions of participants in the experimental group scored above 50 in most domains of the SF – 36. Independent t-tests on baseline QOL showed that both groups were similar except in the domains of energy/fatigue, emotional wellbeing, social functioning, and general health where the control group indicated a significantly higher mean QOL score. This implies that control group participants experience less fatigue, and have better emotional well-being, better social functioning, and general health than the experimental group before intervention. This finding disagrees with the findings of a previous study that reported poor QOL in all the domains of QOL in both experimental and control groups before their educational intervention [20].

A significant difference was also observed in the overall mean QOL score of the intervention and control groups at the pretest stage, the control group had a higher overall mean QOL score than the intervention group. This further showed that the control group participants had a better QOL than the intervention group before the intervention.

However, 6 months after educational intervention, the mean QOL scores of the experimental group increased significantly in all the domains of QOL. Also, the overall mean QOL score of the intervention group increased significantly by 5.87point after the intervention. This implies a positive effect of the intervention on the experimental group. These findings are similar to the findings of the previous finding in Saudi Arabia which revealed statistically significant improvement in four dimensions of HRQOL after their psychoeducational intervention (P < 0.01) [21]. It is also similar to the finding of another study in Iran, which revealed a significant difference in mean scores of physical, psychological, and social domains of QOL after the intervention [22].

Age was inversely correlated with the domains of physical functioning, role physical, energy/fatigue, and pain. As age increases, QOL decreases in these domains. The finding on age with pain is similar to the finding of a study that reported that participants over 60years in their study experience bodily pain [19]. Further, the association between age with role limitation also agrees with the findings of a study where the age of their participants influenced QOL in the dimensions of role limitation and physical endurance [23]. In this study, gender had no significant association with any of the domains of HRQOL. This contradicts the findings of Miguel, et al (2014) in which significant differences were observed between men and women in the domains of pain and social functioning (P < 0.05) [21]. It also contradicts the findings of Mahmoud et.al (2016) that revealed male participants to be better than female participants in HRQOL (P < 0.05) [23].

A significant difference was observed in the PCS and MCS QOL mean score after the intervention; the PCS increased significantly by 9.12points higher than the pretest mean, while the MCS increased by 6.3, thus indicating the effectiveness of the intervention on the PCS and MCS components of HRQOL. A similar study observed similar findings of an increase in QOL scores in PCS and MCS of their participants after 6months of intervention (P < 0.05) [20].

Educational intervention was effective in improving the quality of life in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This is reflected in the significant improvement in the HRQOL of the experimental group after educational intervention as against the control group that did not receive the intervention but just relied on routine diabetic care.

ANCOVA

Analysis of Covariance

QoL

Quality of life

T2DM

Type 2 diabetes

HRQOL

Health-related quality of life

Diabetes Mellitus

WHO

World Health Organization

HbAic

glycosylated hemoglobin

Correlation of difference

IDF

International Diabetes Federation

CDC

Center for Disease Control

NAUTH

Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital

UNTH

University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital

FMCO

Federal Medical Center Owerri

FMCU

Federal Medical Center Umuahia

Contribution to Knowledge

This study was an attempt to find out the effect of an educational intervention program on the QOL of individuals with type 2 DM in South East, Nigeria. We believe that the incorporation of educational intervention in the management of type 2 DM will go a long way in minimizing the development of comorbidities and drug intervention in diabetic patients hence improving the HRQOL of individuals with type 2 diabetes. The outcome has shown that when educational intervention is diligently delivered by the concerned health professionals and complied with by the diabetic patients that positive outcomes in HRQOL are guaranteed. There is a need for health managers to develop a policy that will encourage different health institutions and professionals to incorporate educational intervention in the management of type 2 diabetic patients in their practices. Self-management education should be included in the diabetes care plan and should be given serious attention. We recommend that future studies will be a randomized controlled study involving different regions of the country so that the cause and effect relationship will be determined

Ethics approval and consent to participate

We want to confirm that all methods used in this study were carried out by the relevant guidelines and regulations as contained in the Helsinki declaration as amended in 64^th WMA General Assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil, October 2013. Before the commencement of the study, ethics approval was sought and obtained from the institutional ethics committees of the four tertiary health institutions where data collation took place. They included the Institutional Ethics Committee of Nnamdi Azikiwe Teaching Hospital University, (NAUTHCS/66/VOL.10/2017/015), Federal Medical Center, Umuahia (FMC/QCH/G.596/Vol.10/238, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital (NHREC/05/01/2008B-FWA0002458-IRB0002323), and Federal Medical Centers Owerri (FMC/OW/HREC/172). Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects and their legal guardian(s) before they were enrolled in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The data is with the corresponding author and will be made available on a reasonable request

Competing Interest

The authors report no conflict of interest

Funding

Not Applicable

Acknowledgments

The researchers acknowledge all diabetic clients that participated in this study. We also thank Dr. J.O Umunnah, and Dr. P.O Ibinkule for their useful contributions to the original manuscript. However, they should not be held responsible for any error in this article.

Authors’ Contributions

CNO, COA, CEN, and UPO wrote the main manuscript text, and CMN, PUO, ILO, and AJA prepared tables 1-7. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

World Health Organization. Global Health Estimates: Deaths and Cause, Age, Sex and Country 2000–2012. Geneva. WHO 2014.
International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas. 2011. Global estimates of the prevalence of diabetes for 2011 and 2030. Retrieved from www.diabetesresearch.com.
International Diabetes Federation. Prevalence estimates of diabetes mellitus (updated 2013 June 26). 2014. Retrieved from .
Kiadaliri AA, Najafi B, Mirmalek S. Quality of Life in people with diabetes: A systemic review of studies in Iran. J Diabetes Metabolic Disorders. 2013;12:54. @http://www.jdmdonline,com/content/12/1/54.
International Diabetes Federation (IDF update). About Diabetes. 2014. Retrieved from http://en.m.wikipedia.
International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas 8th Edition; 2017 [updated 2018]. Retrieved March 30, 2019, https://www.idf.org/our-activities/advocacy-awareness/resources-and-tools/134:idf-diabetes-atlas-8th-edition.html.
Ogbera AO, Ekpebegh C. Diabetes Mellitus in Nigeria: The Past, Present, and Future. World J Diabetes. 2014; 5(6): 905–11 doi:10.4239wdj.45-16.905 @http://www.ncbi-nlm.nih.gov.
World Health Organization. WHO Diabetes Fact Sheet N312. 2015. Retrieved from www.who.int/mediacenter. Update Jan 2015.
Gregg W, Klingner J, Casey M, et al. Evidence-Based Heart Failure quality improvement programs and strategies for critical access hosp. USA: Flex Monitoring Team. Retrieved from http://flexmonitoring,org.document/policy brief 26- 2012 Heart FailureQI-CAHs Pdf.
Donald A. What is Quality of Life. volume 1, number 9. http://www.bandolier.org.uk/painres/download/whatis%20copy/WhatisQOL.pdf.
Ana S, Radmila VR, Aleksandra CD, et al. Quality of Life in type 2 diabetic patients. Sci J Fac Med. 2014;31(3):193–200. Doi: 102478/afmnai – 2014-0024.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preventive-care practices among persons with diabetes. United States. 1995 and 2001. 2011c Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5143a2.htm.
Bottomley A, Flechtner H, Efficace F, et al. "Health-related quality of life outcomes in cancer clinical trials" (PDF). Eur J Cancer. 2002;41(12):1697–709. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.05.007.
Cesnales NI, Thyer BA. Health-Related Quality of Life Measures. In: Michalos AC, editor. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_951.
Gul N, Knowledge. Attitude, and Practices of type 2 diabetic patients. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2010;22(3):121–8.
Nadia MT, Ahmed NAE, Zaton HK Impact of a Health educational guidelines on the Knowledge, Self-management practice, and Self-efficacy of patients with type 2 diabetes. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 2016; 6(9) April 2016. Doi.10.5430/jnep.6n9p46. Accessed March 30, 2019, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication.
Dinesh V, Kulkarni AG, Gangadhar NK, Knowledge. Selfcare Practices regarding Diabetes among patients with type 2 diabetes in Rural Sullia, Karnataka, India: A Community Based cross-sectional study. E-J Family Med Prim Care. 2016;5(4):847.
Bonger Z, Shiferaw S, Tariku EZ. Adherence to diabetic self-care practices and its associated factors among patients with type 2 diabetes in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Journal of Patient’s Preference and Adherence 2018:12.DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.SI56043.
Miguel LM, Andres FN, Maria FRJ, et al. Health-Related Quality of Life in patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Rural Area of Southeastern Spain. Diabetes Journal Meta, 2015, 6 (7). Tetrieved from http://dxdoi,org/10.4172-6156.1000572.
Miraj SS, Roy RT, Unnikrishnan M, et.al. Effect of Patient Education on Health-Related Quality of Life of Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU) patients in a Tertiary Hospital, South India. E-Value in Health Journal, 2015;18(7).
Mahmoud SS, Mahdy MH, Mahfouz MS, et al. Effects of a Psychoeducational Intervention Program on Hemoglobin AIC Level and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with type 2 diabetes Mellitus in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Biomed Research International Journal, 2018. Article ID 6915467. Retrieved from https://www.hindawi.com/journal/bmri/2018/6915467.
Alireza D, Davoud S, Mohammed A Impact of educational intervention based on interactive approaches on belief, behaviors, haemoglobin AIc and Quality of Life in diabetic women. International Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2016; 7(38) doi.10.4130/2008–7802. 176004.
Nyazi R, Wamala R, Atuhare LK Diabetes and Quality of Life. A Ugandan Perspective. Journal of Diabetes Research, 2014 (1). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/402012.

Tables 1 to 7 are available in the Supplementary Files section.

No competing interests reported.

EducationofDMTableLegendBMC.docx

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 07 Apr, 2023

Read the published version in BMC Endocrine Disorders →

Editorial decision: Major revision
21 Nov, 2022
Reviews received at journal
10 Nov, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
29 Oct, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
27 Oct, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
17 Oct, 2022
Editor invited by journal
07 Oct, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
07 Oct, 2022
First submitted to journal
29 Sep, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Effect of Educational Intervention Programme on the Health- Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) of Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in South-east, Nigeria.

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Introduction

Methodology

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Tables

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1