MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2578942704 · doi:10.5339/qfarc.2016.hbsp1171

Using the Transtheoretical Model to Enhance Self-management Activities in Type 2 Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review

2016· review· en· W2578942704 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yara Arafat

Notice bibliographique

RevueQatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1 · 2016
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDiabetes Management and Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTranstheoretical modelBehavior changeHealth promotionPromotion (chess)Psychological interventionDiseaseBehaviour changeRegulatory focus theoryPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Self-managementApplied psychologyMedicineType 2 diabetesChronic diseaseDiabetes mellitusGerontologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyNursingPublic healthFamily medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Many health organizations are always highlighting the importance of health promotion, and disease prevention, due to the high incidence of chronic diseases that are spread worldwide and increasing continuously. One of the most prevalent chronic diseases is diabetes mellitus (DM). Many studies conducted in developed countries proved that lifestyle changes in patients resulted in a reduction in the prevalence of diabetes, and that there's a link between DM, and behavioral, clinical, and economical outcomes. Furthermore there was an affiliation between knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP), and DM. Even though self-management of type 2 diabetes is necessary in order to improve quality of life, many patients still have a problem with being able to self-manage diabetes. Many models and interventions were tested to enhance self-management but none were successful so far. Self-management is a socio-behavioral problem, and the use of a model such as the transtheoretical model (TTM) could improve it. TTM is one of the most commonly used behavioral models. It was first introduced in the 1980s by Prochaska and DiClemente to explain how people change their behavior, but not why they change. It is a model of choice that focuses on the decision making capabilities of individuals. This model is different to alternative approaches to health promotion in that its primarily focus is not on social and biological behavioural influences. It is a psychological health promotion model about the intention of change. It is a model of choice that focuses on the decision making capabilities of individuals. It first uses the baseline information, with an aim to alter self-efficacy, cues, or other psychosocial factors using five TTM principles: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, and Maintenance. Objective: The objective of this study is to collect enough evidence using a systematic review in order to assess the use of TTM in improving self-management activities in type 2 diabetic patients. Self-management activities include following a healthier diet, exercising more regularly, and an enhanced medication adherence. Methods: The systematic review was conducted between February and May 2015. PubMed (n = 83), Medline (n = 126), Science direct (n = 985), and Cochrane (n = 62) were the databases searched with predefined terms relating to TTM interventions for type 2 diabetic patients. A second extensive search was conducted using google, and google scholar (n = 2) to retrieve articles relevant to the research. The search strategy aimed to identify articles in which the Transtheoretical model had been applied and which had been published in English between 2000 and March 2015. In order to ensure that all potentially relevant articles had been identified, the search terms included “Transtheoretical model”, “Sociobehavioral”, “social changes”, “diabetes”, and “self-management”. All study designs were included and no limits were set to articles comparing the behavioral model to other approaches. The methods used for this review followed the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The systematic search was conducted in March 2015. The initial search of the above strategy yielded 1,153 articles. These articles were reviewed by the primary author for relevance to the aims of the review. Retained articles were then assessed for relevance to the aims based on the title and the abstract using the inclusion criteria. Articles identified as potential for inclusion were then retrieved. Each step during the selection process was conducted by two researchers, and in case of disagreement, consensus would be reached with the aid of a third researcher. Results: There was consensus in the review team that the 10 papers met the inclusion criteria. The 10 studies included were published between 2003 and 2011, and were conducted in the US (n = 6), Canada (n = 1), Trinidad and Tobago (n = 1), Scotland (n = 1), and one was unspecified. In all 10 studies, the majority of participants at baseline were at the Precontemplation/Contemplation or Preparation stage, and after the TTM intervention the majority of patients were at the Action or Maintenance stage. Four studies did not specify which stage had the highest number of participants at baseline and post TTM intervention. In one study, the highest number of participants was at the preparation stage (39.1%) at baseline, and after the TTM intervention the highest number of patients was in the action phase (45.7%) indicating an advancement through the stages of change. Moreover, in 4 studies most of the patients at baseline were in the pre-action stage, but at follow-up after the TTM interventions most of the participants moved to the action or maintenance stage. In one study, the greatest number of participants was at the action/maintenance stage pre- and post- the TTM intervention. All studies demonstrated some positive outcomes self-management due to implementing TTM. Four studies reported a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 5 studies reported improvements in diet after TTM, and Participants exercised more in 2 studies. In one study there was progress towards reaching participants’ goals whether it's better adherence, diet, or more exercise. However, using the TTM had no change on medication use in any of the studies included. Moreover, Different study designs were used in all studies. 2 studies were pre-test/post-test. In addition, there were 3 Randomized controlled trials (1 was an RCT, 1 was a randomized split plot design where there was a group receiving the usual care and another receiving the intervention, and another study was a cohort randomized controlled prospective trial). One study was a quasi-experimental study. Three studies were reviews; one was a preliminary study which is an economic evaluation of a theoretical cohort of patients. The other one was a study describing how resources and supports for self-management (RSSM) and strategies of the transtheoretical model intersect to produce a comprehensive approach resulting in cutting-edge diabetes Program, and the last review was determining the impact of TTM in changing the unhealthy dietary habits of type 2 diabetic patients. Moreover, one article followed a cross sectional study design which consisted of questionnaires. Conclusion: Ten articles using TTM to self-manage type 2 diabetes were identified and critically reviewed. The narrative findings from this systematic review provide evidence that TTM interventions are effective in promoting exercise, and encouraging participants to pursue a healthier diet. However, the effect of TTM on medication adherence has not been clearly identified yet, and it should be studied in future research.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,437
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,081
Tête enseignante GPT0,435
Écart entre enseignants0,353 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueQatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1Même sujetDiabetes Management and EducationTravaux en français237 207