Effectiveness of Lifestyle Modification Counseling on Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients

Abstract

This study was carried out to assess the effectiveness of lifestyle modification counseling using lifestyle intervention holistic model and its adherence towards glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. This quasi-experimental prospective study was conducted among 224 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Delhi Diabetes Research Center, New Delhi. The study participants were allocated to lifestyle modification counseling group (intervention) and usual care (control) group based on receiving or not receiving lifestyle modification counseling using lifestyle intervention holistic model. Effect of counseling on glycemic control was assessed at baseline and follow up of both the groups at 3rd, 6th and 12th months after receiving lifestyle modification counseling. The collected data was analyzed for percentage, mean, median, standard deviation, chi-squared, t-test and Wilcoxon test. In this study, the lifestyle modification counseling proved to be effective and showed significant improvement in fasting blood sugar (175.5±32.3 to 144.7±17.6), postprandial blood sugar (275.5±61. to199.0±48.3), hemoglobin A1c by 9.3±1.5 to 8.4±1.3. Significant improvement was observed in diastolic blood pressure (82.6±7.0 to79.4±6.1) and high-density lipoproteins cholesterol (47.3±10.5 to 58.8±5.6) from 3rd to 12th months follow up with significant p value 0.001 in the intervention group. The study showed good adherence to balanced diet, physical activity, and tobacco and alcohol cessation but less adherence was observed towards meditation for stress management, regular checkups, and medicine adherence. Lifestyle modification counseling is an effective, noninvasive approach towards glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Lifestyle intervention holistic model used in this counseling may be helpful for type 2 diabetes mellitus patients to improve adherence and self-care behavior towards the management of their diabetes.

Impactos das intervenções educativas nutricionais na qualidade de vida de pacientes com diabetes mellitus tipo 2: uma revisão sistemática

“…Vários benefícios das intervenções da educação nutricional foram observados paralelamente a melhora da qualidade de vida, no que se refere aos conhecimentos adquiridos, perda de peso, diminuição da circunferência da cintura/quadril, redução da HbA1C e do colesterol total. Outras evidências corroboram os benefícios das intervenções educativas sobre o aumento do conhecimento nutricional (Berrones et al, 2020;Myers et al, 2017), redução do peso e melhorias na composição corporal (circunferência do braço, dobra cutânea do tríceps) (Krishnan et al, 2015), redução da HbA1C (Subhan et al, 2022), sendo que quanto mais intensivas (visita mais frequentes) e/ou mais abrangentes as intervenções, mais são sustentados os resultados na HbA1c (Kumari et al, 2018), em relação aquelas menos intensas ou curtas (Thadchanamoorthy et al, 2021).…”

A hospital-based assessment of glycemic control and medication adherence in type 2 diabetes mellitus in Eastern Nepal

“…A semi-structured proforma was prepared through an extensive literature review and expert advice to collect the relevant data. [ 6 18 19 ] It was divided into four sections: (A) sociodemographic data, (B) diabetes self-care practices, (C) knowledge of diabetes mellitus, and (D) MA. Score 1 was given to the correct response and zero for other responses.…”

The effectiveness of diabetes self-management education intervention on glycaemic control and cardiometabolic risk in adults with type 2 diabetes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The characteristics of the included studies are reported in Table 1. Of the 44 studies, 21 were conducted in upper-middle-income countries , 21 in lower-middle-income countries [1,38,[72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90], and two were conducted in low-income countries [91,92], as grouped by the World Bank criteria [41]. The studies were conducted in diabetes clinics or hospitals (n = 15 [34%]), public or private hospitals/clinics (n = 21[48%]) and community settings/home-based locations (n = 8 [18%]).…”

“…Five trials used DM self-management-based coaching programmes [54,67,80,89,91], four trials used the empowerment approach and interactive teaching model [63,64,74,76], and three used the theory of self-efficacy as a theory or model to underpin intervention content [65,66,68]. Each of the following models was used by one trial only: the beliefs, attitudes, subjective norms and enabling factors (BASNEF) model [72]; the predisposing, reinforcing and enabling constructs in educational diagnosis and evaluation (PRECEDE) model [78]; the chronic care model [58]; clinic-based intensified diabetes management model (C-IDM) [60]; the healthbelief model [81]; the comprehensive systematic health education and promotion (SHEP) model [85]; the diabetes comprehensive care model (DCCM) [88]; the structured DSME model [38] and the lifestyle intervention holistic model (LIHM) [90]. The remaining 23 trials Approximately 73% (n = 32) of the interventions were delivered using a face-to-face format, 20% (n = 9) utilising face-to-face intervention with telephone follow-up and 7% (n = 3) using a remotely delivered text message/web-based intervention.…”

“…A quality assessment was carried out for each of the quasi-experimental studies using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist [44,89,90]. However, the assessment was a subjective measure that was dependent on the author carrying out the assessment.…”