National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education

Funnell, Martha M.; Brown, Tammy L.; Childs, Belinda P.; Haas, Linda B.; Hosey, Gwen; Jensen, Brian; Maryniuk, Melinda D.; Peyrot, Mark; Piette, John D.; Reader, Diane; Siminerio, Linda M.; Weinger, Katie; Weiss, Michael A.

doi:10.1177/0145721707305880

Cited by 123 publications

(145 citation statements)

References 137 publications

(209 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For the presentation aspect of Goffman's metaphor, the setting and the appearance of the act are influenced by the props the player is using or, in the case of diabetes, the technologies used. Although there have been attempts to mitigate the influences of social factors on self-care through educating people with T1D about potential social challenges [11], less is known about how the design of mobile medical devices might impact the presentation of self for people with T1D in the context of their everyday social lives.…”

Section: Social Factors and Self-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concealing or Revealing Mobile Medical Devices?

O’Kane

Rogers

Blandford

2015

Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adults with Type 1 Diabetes have choices regarding the technology they use to self-manage their chronic condition. They can use glucose meters, insulin pumps, smartphone apps, and other technologies to support their everyday care. However, little is known about how their social lives might influence what they adopt or how they use technologies. A multi-method study was conducted to examine contextual factors that influence their technology use. While individual differences play a large role in everyday use, social factors were also found to influence use. For example, people can hide their devices in uncertain social situations or show them off to achieve a purpose. We frame these social behaviours using Goffman's theatre metaphor of onstage and offstage behaviour, and discuss how this kind of analysis can inform the design of future mobile medical devices for self-management of chronic conditions.

show abstract

Section: Social Factors and Self-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concealing or Revealing Mobile Medical Devices?

O’Kane

Rogers

Blandford

2015

Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This method has been used in chronic disease self-management training [1,2] and is central in many newly developed diabetes education programs [3,4]. These programs have incorporated goal setting to help patients improve their self-efficacy in diabetes management, change their behavior, and improve their health outcomes [1,2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Goal setting in diabetes self-management: Taking the baby steps to success

DeWalt

Davis

Wallace

et al. 2009

Patient Education and Counseling

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the usefulness of a diabetes self-management guide and a brief counseling intervention in helping patients set and achieve their behavioral goals. Methods We conducted a quasi-experimental study using a one group pretest posttest design to assess the effectiveness of a goal setting intervention along with a self-management guide. English- and Spanish-speaking patients with diabetes had one in-person session and two telephone follow-up calls with a non-clinical provider over a 12–16-week period. At each call and at the end of the study, we assessed success in achieving behavioral goals and problem solving toward those goals. Satisfaction with the self-management guide was assessed at the end of the study. Results We enrolled 250 patients across three sites and 229 patients completed the study. Most patients chose to set goals in diet and exercise domains. 93% of patients achieved at least one behavioral goal during the study and 73% achieved at least two behavioral goals. Many patients exhibited problem solving behavior to achieve their goals. We found no significant differences in reported achievement of behavior goals by literacy or language. Patients were very satisfied with the guide. Conclusions A brief goal setting intervention along with a diabetes self-management guide helped patients set and achieve healthy behavioral goals. Practice implications Non-clinical providers can successfully help a diverse range of patients with diabetes set and achieve behavioral goals.

show abstract

“…[16,24,30] The extent to which adults can better understand how related diabetes management processes can actually affect their subsequent diabetes-related health during office visits certainly requires more systematic testing. [31][32][33] Further implementation and testing of feasible SDM and patient-centric office visit protocols may serve to facilitate more meaningful patient engagement with clinicians during periodic office visits. Although it may be unrealistic for some adults with especially dysfunctional habits to incorporate some dimensions of diabetes management into their daily behaviors, helping adults understand the linkage of their formal and daily personal diabetes management processes in health promotion programs may prove imperative for assisting many to achieve their diabetes management goals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Adult Diabetes Mellitus Management Perceptions

Corser

Lein

Holmes‐Rovner

et al. 2010

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Over 180 million people have been diagnosed with diabetes mellitus worldwide, with this number expected to more than double by 2030. Due to the increasing mortality and morbidity associated with this epidemic, the improved primary-care management of diabetes during routine office visits remains an emerging international challenge. Objective: To report the results of a series of exploratory semi-structured group interview sessions with a sample of 44 American adults with type 2 diabetes, concerning their diabetes management perceptions and office-based diabetes care processes. Methods: A total of 44 adults from a Midwest Internal Medicine Clinic were interviewed during 2004 and 2005 before starting a larger, quantitative, shared decision-making intervention study. During group interviews, participants offered their perceptions of their self-management practices, interactions with office clinicians, and diabetes-related health outcomes to date. A total of 178 audio-taped interview comments (across 44 participants) were transcribed and analyzed for core themes and sub-themes. Results: Many participants reported frustrating experiences regarding the relationship between their personal diabetes self-management practices and typical office visit interactions with clinicians. Most participants perceived these diabetes management processes as inherently different from each other. Many participants were intrigued with the proposed shared decision-making management approach of the larger intervention study. Conclusions: Primary-care clinicians should assess how patients may perceive their self-management strategies relate to office-based diabetes care processes. Patients' self-management beliefs and practices should be routinely evaluated since they frequently affect the nature of key diabetes care office visit decisions. These qualitative results suggest that clinicians should convey the increasing interdependence between their patients' daily diabetes self-management practices and contemporary office visit decision-making discussions.

show abstract

National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education

Cited by 123 publications

References 137 publications

Concealing or Revealing Mobile Medical Devices?

Concealing or Revealing Mobile Medical Devices?

Goal setting in diabetes self-management: Taking the baby steps to success

Contemporary Adult Diabetes Mellitus Management Perceptions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About