Cargando…

Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service

Objective. The rural Central Gippsland Health Service (CGHS) assists patients with diabetes through the provision of diabetes education. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the CGHS 5-week didactic program and a modified group-participatory Conversation Maps diabetes education prog...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kewming, Sue, D’Amore, Angelo, Mitchell, Eleanor K.L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Diabetes Association 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4755459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26912963
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diaspect.29.1.32
_version_ 1782416195930030080
author Kewming, Sue
D’Amore, Angelo
Mitchell, Eleanor K.L.
author_facet Kewming, Sue
D’Amore, Angelo
Mitchell, Eleanor K.L.
author_sort Kewming, Sue
collection PubMed
description Objective. The rural Central Gippsland Health Service (CGHS) assists patients with diabetes through the provision of diabetes education. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the CGHS 5-week didactic program and a modified group-participatory Conversation Maps diabetes education program. Method. A pre- and post-program survey was conducted of clients who attended the two different diabetes education programs. The survey consisted of a self-constructed demographic questionnaire, the Diabetes Knowledge Test, the Diabetes Empowerment Scale, and the Diabetes Self-Care Activities Measure. Results. For the CGHS program, there were no differences between pre- and post-program surveys in knowledge scores (11.05 ± 3.56 vs. 12.75 ± 4.19, P = 0.0883, n = 20), self-care activities (4.46 ± 1.11 vs. 4.83 ± 0.68, P = 0.0832, n = 12), or empowerment scores (7.16 ± 1.60 vs. 7.92 ± 1.26, P = 0.0540, n = 17). For the modified Conversation Maps program, there were significant improvements between pre- and post-program surveys in knowledge scores (12.42 ± 4.15 vs. 15.54 ± 3.79, P = 0.0004, n = 26), self-care activities (4.74 ± 1.09 vs. 5.32 ± 0.80, P = 0.0139, n = 24), and empowerment scores (6.56 ± 2.19 vs. 8.11 ± 1.46, P = 0.0016, n = 21). The greatest difference between the two programs was observed in knowledge gain (P = 0.0178). Overall, participants were satisfied with both programs, with no difference seen in satisfaction levels (P = 0.9763). A1C results improved in both programs to a mean of 6.7% (P = 0.0071 for CGHS and P = 0.0092 for Conversation Maps). Conclusion. The modified Conversation Maps program resulted in significant improvements for rural participants.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4755459
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher American Diabetes Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47554592017-02-01 Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service Kewming, Sue D’Amore, Angelo Mitchell, Eleanor K.L. Diabetes Spectr Feature Article Objective. The rural Central Gippsland Health Service (CGHS) assists patients with diabetes through the provision of diabetes education. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the CGHS 5-week didactic program and a modified group-participatory Conversation Maps diabetes education program. Method. A pre- and post-program survey was conducted of clients who attended the two different diabetes education programs. The survey consisted of a self-constructed demographic questionnaire, the Diabetes Knowledge Test, the Diabetes Empowerment Scale, and the Diabetes Self-Care Activities Measure. Results. For the CGHS program, there were no differences between pre- and post-program surveys in knowledge scores (11.05 ± 3.56 vs. 12.75 ± 4.19, P = 0.0883, n = 20), self-care activities (4.46 ± 1.11 vs. 4.83 ± 0.68, P = 0.0832, n = 12), or empowerment scores (7.16 ± 1.60 vs. 7.92 ± 1.26, P = 0.0540, n = 17). For the modified Conversation Maps program, there were significant improvements between pre- and post-program surveys in knowledge scores (12.42 ± 4.15 vs. 15.54 ± 3.79, P = 0.0004, n = 26), self-care activities (4.74 ± 1.09 vs. 5.32 ± 0.80, P = 0.0139, n = 24), and empowerment scores (6.56 ± 2.19 vs. 8.11 ± 1.46, P = 0.0016, n = 21). The greatest difference between the two programs was observed in knowledge gain (P = 0.0178). Overall, participants were satisfied with both programs, with no difference seen in satisfaction levels (P = 0.9763). A1C results improved in both programs to a mean of 6.7% (P = 0.0071 for CGHS and P = 0.0092 for Conversation Maps). Conclusion. The modified Conversation Maps program resulted in significant improvements for rural participants. American Diabetes Association 2016-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4755459/ /pubmed/26912963 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diaspect.29.1.32 Text en © 2016 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 for details.
spellingShingle Feature Article
Kewming, Sue
D’Amore, Angelo
Mitchell, Eleanor K.L.
Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title_full Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title_fullStr Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title_full_unstemmed Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title_short Conversation Maps and Diabetes Education Groups: An Evaluation at an Australian Rural Health Service
title_sort conversation maps and diabetes education groups: an evaluation at an australian rural health service
topic Feature Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4755459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26912963
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diaspect.29.1.32
work_keys_str_mv AT kewmingsue conversationmapsanddiabeteseducationgroupsanevaluationatanaustralianruralhealthservice
AT damoreangelo conversationmapsanddiabeteseducationgroupsanevaluationatanaustralianruralhealthservice
AT mitchelleleanorkl conversationmapsanddiabeteseducationgroupsanevaluationatanaustralianruralhealthservice