medigraphic.com

2018, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Cir Cir 2018; 86 (5)

Multimedia education to support management of type 2 diabetes patients. A quasi-experimental study

Pineda-del Aguila I, Velázquez-López L, Goycochea-Robles MV, Angulo-Angulo F, Escobedo-de la Peña J

Language: Spanish
References: 34
Page: 404-411
PDF size: 487.60 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of education through a multimedia information system, in controlling patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: Randomized open clinical trial. The intervention group was trained to consult an educative multimedia tool in the waiting room, which was developed according to the population characteristics and centered on monitoring indicators, information on type 2 diabetes and nutrition. Venous blood concentrations of glucose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), triglycerides, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were measured. Paired t Student was used to assess the effect of the intervention. Results: 2,334 patients were included, 958 in the intervention group and 1,376 in the control group. In the intervention group, an increase in HDL-c values was observed (from 40.45 to 47.40 mg/dL; p=0.001) as well as a descent on triglycerides values (from 227.78 to 210.38 mg/dL; p=0.001). There was a reduction on triglycerides levels in the control group (from 232.64 to 210.84 mg/dL; p=0.016). There was a significative increase in total cholesterol values in both groups. There were no changes in the mean values of glucose and HbA1c after the intervention. Conclusion: Implementation of a multimedia information system improves HDL-c and triglycerides in patients with diabetes. There is a need for a continuous reinforcement of the educative intervention by health professionals to improve glycemic and other indicators in metabolic control.


REFERENCES

  1. American Diabetes Association. Foundations of care: education, nutrition, physical activity, smoking cessation, psychosocial care, and immunization. Sec. 4. In Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2015. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(Suppl. 1):S20-S30.

  2. Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, Blonde L, Bloomgardenet ZT, Bush MA, et al. AACE comprehensive diabetes management algorithm 2013. Endocr Pract. 2013;19:327-36.

  3. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes — 2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;40(Suppl 1):S38-S50.

  4. Chrvala CA, Sherr D, Lipman RD. Diabetes self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of the effect on glycemic control. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99:926-43.

  5. Funnell, MM, Anderson, RM, Arnold MS, Barr PA, Donnelly MB, Johnson PD, et al. Empowerment: an idea whose time has come in diabetes education. Diabetes Educ. 1991;17:37-41.

  6. Haas L, Maryniuk M, Beck J, Cox CE, Duker P, Edwards L, et al. National standards for diabetes self-management education and support. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:2393-401.

  7. Wyne K. Information technology for the treatment of diabetes: improving outcomes and controlling costs. J Manag Care Pharm. 2008;14(2 Suppl): S12-S17.

  8. Davis BU. Benefits of information technology — enabled diabetes management. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:1137-42.

  9. Kaufman N. Information technology in the service of diabetes prevention and treatment. Int J Clin Pract. 2011;65:47-54.

  10. Hunt JS, Siemienczuk J, Gillanders W, LeBlanc BH, Rozenfeld Y, Bonin K, et al. The impact of a physician-directed health information technology system on diabetes outcomes in primary care: a pre- and post-implementation study. Inform Prim Care. 2009;17:165-74.

  11. Kandula NR, Nsiah-Kumi PA, Makoul G, Sager J, Zei CP, Glass S, et al. The relationship between health literacy and knowledge improvement after a multimedia type 2 diabetes education program. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;75:321-7.

  12. Boren SA, Gunlock TL, Peeples MM, Krishna S. Computerized learning technologies for diabetes: a systematic review. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2:139-46.

  13. Nundy S, Lu CYE, Hogan P, Mishra A, Peek ME. Using patient-generated health data from mobile technologies for diabetes self-management support: provider perspectives from an academic medical center. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014;8:74-82.

  14. Hadjiconstantinou M, Byrne J, Bodicoat DH, Robertson N, Eborall H, Khunti K, et al. Do web-based interventions improve well-being in type 2 diabetes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18:e270.

  15. Velázquez-López L, Muñoz-Torres AV, Medina-Bravo P, Vilchis-Gil J, Klϋnder- Klϋnder M, Escobedo-de la Peña J. Multimedia education program and nutrition therapy improves HbA1c, weight, and lipid profile of patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. Endocrine. 2017;58:236-45.

  16. Jethwani K, Ling E, Mohammed M, Myint-U K, Pelletier A, Kvedar JC. Diabetes connect: an evaluation of patient adoption and engagement in a web-based remote glucose monitoring program. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:1328-36.

  17. Pérez Lizaur AB, Marván LL. Sistema mexicano de alimentos equivalentes. Fomento de Nutrición y Salud, AC. 4.ª ed. México; 2014.

  18. Gerber BS, Brodsky IG, Lawless KA, Smolin LI, Arozullah AM, Smith EV, et al. Implementation and evaluation of a low-literacy diabetes education computer multimedia application. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:1574-80.

  19. Chamberlain JJ, Herman WH, Leal S, Rhinehart AS, Shubrook JH, Skolnik N, et al. Pharmacologic therapy for type 2 diabetes: synopsis of the 2017 American Diabetes Association standards of medical care in diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:572-8.

  20. Powers, MA, Bardsley J, Cypress M, Duker P, Funnell MM, Fischl AH, et al. Diabetes self-management education and support in type 2 diabetes: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015;115:1323-34.

  21. Arnhold M, Quade M, Kirch W. Mobile applications for diabetics: a systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation considering the special requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e104.

  22. Kandula NR, Nsiah-Kumi PA, Makoul G, Sager J, Zei CP, Glass S, et al. The relationship between health literacy and knowledge improvement after a multimedia type 2 diabetes education program. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;75:321-7.

  23. Kelders SM, Kok RN, Ossebaard HC, Van Gemert-Pijnen JE. Persuasive system design does matter: a systematic review of adherence to web-based interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e152.

  24. Mohr DC, Cuijpers P, Lehman K. Supportive accountability: a model for providing human support to enhance adherence to eHealth interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e30.

  25. Spring B, Duncan JM, Janke EA, Kozak AT, McFadden HG, DeMott A, et al. Integrating technology into standard weight loss treatment: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:105-11.

  26. Beck J, Greenwood DA, Blanton L, Bollinger ST, Butcher MK, Condon JE, et al. 2017 National standards for diabetes self-management education and support. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1409-19.

  27. Rollo ME, Aguiar EJ, Williams RL, Wynne K, Kriss M, Callister R, et al. eHealth technologies to support nutrition and physical activity behaviors in diabetes self-management. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2016;4:381‑90.

  28. Khansa L, Davis Z, Davis H, Chin A, Irvine H, Nichols L, et al. Health information technologies for patients with diabetes. Technology in Society. 2016;44:1-9.

  29. David SK, Rafiullah MRM. Innovative health informatics as an effective modern strategy in diabetes management: a critical review. Int J Clin Pract. 2016;70:434-49.

  30. Oviedo E, Fernández A. Tecnologías de la información y la comunicación en el sector salud: oportunidades y desafíos para reducir inequidades en América Latina y el Caribe. CEPAL – Serie Políticas Sociales No. 165. Santiago de Chile; 2010.

  31. Jimison H, Gorman P, Woods S, Nygren P, Walker M, Norris S, et al. Barriers and drivers of health information technology use for the elderly, chronically ill, and underserved. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 175 (Prepared by the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0024). AHRQ Publication No. 09-E004. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; November 2008.

  32. Didarloo A, Shojaeizadeh D, Alizadeh M. Impact of educational intervention based on interactive approaches on beliefs, behavior, hemoglobin A1c, and quality of life in diabetic women. Int J Prev Med. 2016;7:38.

  33. Gazzaruso C, Fodaro M, Coppola A. Structured therapeutic education in diabetes: is it time to re-write the chapter on the prevention of diabetic complications? Endocrine. 2016;53:347-9.

  34. Bauer AM, Thielke SM, Katon W, Unützer J, Areán P. Aligning health information technologies with effective service delivery models to improve chronic disease care. Prev Med. 2014;66:167-72.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com