A Modified Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System to Assess Diabetes Self-management Behaviors and Diabetes Care in Monterrey Mexico: A Cross-sectional Study
AuthorMcEwen, Marylyn Morris
Elizondo-Pereo, Rogelio Andrès
Pasvogel, Alice E.
AffiliationUniv Arizona, Coll Nursing
Univ Arizona, Mel & Enid Zuckerman Coll Publ Hlth
Keywordstype 2 diabetes
type 2 diabetes mellitus
behavioral risk factor surveillance system
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherFRONTIERS MEDIA SA
CitationA Modified Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System to Assess Diabetes Self-management Behaviors and Diabetes Care in Monterrey Mexico: A Cross-sectional Study 2017, 5 Frontiers in Public Health
JournalFrontiers in Public Health
Rights© 2017 McEwen, Elizondo-Pereo, Pasvogel, Meester, Vargas-Villarreal and González-Salazar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
Collection InformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
AbstractType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the leading causes of death from worldwide non-communicable diseases. The prevalence of diabetes in the Mexico (MX)-United States border states exceeds the national rate in both countries. The economic burden of diabetes, due to decreased productivity, disability, and medical costs, is staggering and increases significantly when T2DM-related complications occur. The purpose of this study was to use a modified behavioral risk factor surveillance system (BRFSS) to describe the T2DM self-management behaviors, diabetes care, and health perception of a convenience sample of adults with T2DM in Monterrey, MX. This cross-sectional study design, with convenience sampling, was conducted with a convenience sample (n = 351) of adults in the metropolitan area of Monterrey, MX who self-reported a diagnosis of T2DM. Potential participants were recruited from local supermarkets. Twenty-six diabetes and health-related items were selected from the BRFSS and administered in face-to-face interviews by trained data collectors. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics. The mean age was 47 years, and the mean length of time with T2DM was 12 years. The majority was taking oral medication and 34% required insulin. Daily self-monitoring of feet was performed by 56% of the participants; however, only 8.8% engaged in blood glucose self-monitoring. The mean number of health-care provider visits was 9.09 per year, and glycated hemoglobin level (HbA1c) was assessed 2.6 times per year. Finally, only 40.5% of the participants recalled having a dilated eye exam. We conclude the modified BRFSS survey administered in a face-to-face interview format is an appropriate tool for assessing engagement in T2DM self-management behaviors, diabetes care, and health perception. Extension of the use of this survey in a more rigorous design with a larger scale survey is encouraged.
NoteOpen Access Journal.
VersionFinal published version
SponsorsPuentes Consortium; Consejo Nacional De Ciencia y Tecnologia de Mexico
- Prevalence of selected risk behaviors and chronic diseases--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), 39 steps communities, United States, 2005.
- Authors: Ramsey F, Ussery-Hall A, Garcia D, McDonald G, Easton A, Kambon M, Balluz L, Garvin W, Vigeant J, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
- Issue date: 2008 Oct 31
- Analysis of behavior risk factor surveillance system data to assess the health of Hispanics with diabetes in US-Mexico border communities.
- Authors: McEwen MM, Lin PC, Pasvogel A
- Issue date: 2013 Nov-Dec
- Surveillance for certain health behaviors among states and selected local areas--behavioral risk factor surveillance system, United States, 2004.
- Authors: Hughes E, McCracken M, Roberts H, Mokdad AH, Valluru B, Goodson R, Dunn E, Elam-Evans L, Giles W, Jiles R
- Issue date: 2006 Jul 14
- Surveillance of certain health behaviors and conditions among states and selected local areas --- Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United States, 2009.
- Authors: Li C, Balluz LS, Okoro CA, Strine TW, Lin JM, Town M, Garvin W, Murphy W, Bartoli W, Valluru B, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
- Issue date: 2011 Aug 19
- Prevalence of selected risk behaviors and chronic diseases and conditions-steps communities, United States, 2006-2007.
- Authors: Cory S, Ussery-Hall A, Griffin-Blake S, Easton A, Vigeant J, Balluz L, Garvin W, Greenlund K, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
- Issue date: 2010 Sep 24
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
After receiving language concordant, individual health education interventions, do Spanish speaking, diabetic inpatients at a safety net hospital demonstrate acquired diabetes self-management competency as measured by pre-training and post training evaluation of key, diabetes self-management knowledge?Cagle, Jonathan; The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix; Abdollahi, Shagyegh (The University of Arizona., 2018-03-28)The purpose of this research was to assess the quality of the inpatient, health education diabetes program as it relates to primary Spanish speaking patients. Complications from diabetes account for huge personal and financial costs. There is substantial evidence supporting the use of targeted diabetes education to reduce complications but we need to know if our education interventions are valid. In order to accomplish this by auditing the knowledge of a sample of inpatient diabetics before and after receiving the standard MMC Spanish language diabetes education interventions via Spanish language pre and post surveys (standardized by the previously validated SKILLD survey). Demographic and clinical data were analyzed and all significant data (p value <0.05) were considered for their importance. The data demonstrated that in all 10 items on the survey, overall patients were able to demonstrate significant improvement in survey scores. Additionally, comparisons of demographic data demonstrated that being less than 50 years old was associated with improved survey scores. This indicates overall benefit of the training program as well as possible insight into need for more aggressive training for patients greater than 50 years in age.
Diabetic Foot Australia guideline on footwear for people with diabetes.van Netten, Jaap J; Lazzarini, Peter A; Armstrong, David G; Bus, Sicco A; Fitridge, Robert; Harding, Keith; Kinnear, Ewan; Malone, Matthew; Menz, Hylton B; Perrin, Byron M; et al. (BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 2018)Background: The aim of this paper was to create an updated Australian guideline on footwear for people with diabetes. Methods: We reviewed new footwear publications, (international guidelines, and consensus expert opinion alongside the 2013 Australian footwear guideline to formulate updated recommendations. Result: We recommend health professionals managing people with diabetes should: (1) Advise people with diabetes to wear footwear that fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (2) Advise people with diabetes to always wear socks within their footwear, in order to reduce shear and friction. (3) Educate people with diabetes, their relatives and caregivers on the importance of wearing appropriate footwear to prevent foot ulceration. (4) Instruct people with diabetes at intermediate-or high-risk of foot ulceration to obtain footwear from an appropriately trained professional to ensure it fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (5) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate-or high-risk of foot ulceration to wear their footwear at all times, both indoors and outdoors. (6) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate-or high-risk of foot ulceration (or their relatives and caregivers) to check their footwear, each time before wearing, to ensure that there are no foreign objects in, or penetrating, the footwear; and check their feet, each time their footwear is removed, to ensure there are no signs of abnormal pressure, trauma or ulceration. (7) For people with a foot deformity or pre-ulcerative lesion, consider prescribing medical grade footwear, which may include custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles. (8) For people with a healed plantar foot ulcer, prescribe medical grade footwear with custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles with a demonstrated plantar pressure relieving effect at high-risk areas. (9) Review prescribed footwear every three months to ensure it still fits adequately, protects, and supports the foot. (10) For people with a plantar diabetic foot ulcer, footwear is not specifically recommended for treatment; prescribe appropriate offloading devices to heal these ulcers. Conclusions: This guideline contains 10 key recommendations to guide health professionals in selecting the most appropriate footwear to meet the specific foot risk needs of an individual with diabetes.
How do Australian podiatrists manage patients with diabetes? The Australian diabetic foot management surveyQuinton, T. R.; Lazzarini, P. A.; Boyle, F. M.; Russell, A. W.; Armstrong, D. G.; Department of Prosthetics, Orthotics, & Podiatry, Princess Alexandra Hospital; School of Population Health, The University of Queensland; Allied Health Research Collaborative, Metro North Hospital & Health Service, Queensland Health; School of Clinical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology; Department of Diabetes & Endocrinology, Princess Alexandra Hospital; et al. (BioMed Central, 2015)BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot complications are the leading cause of lower extremity amputation and diabetes-related hospitalisation in Australia. Studies demonstrate significant reductions in amputations and hospitalisation when health professionals implement best practice management. Whilst other nations have surveyed health professionals on specific diabetic foot management, to the best of the authors' knowledge this appears not to have occurred in Australia. The primary aim of this study was to examine Australian podiatrists' diabetic foot management compared with best practice recommendations by the Australian National Health Medical Research Council. METHODS: A 36-item Australian Diabetic Foot Management survey, employing seven-point Likert scales (0 = Never; 7 = Always) to measure multiple aspects of best practice diabetic foot management was developed. The survey was briefly tested for face and content validity. The survey was electronically distributed to Australian podiatrists via professional associations. Demographics including sex, years treating patients with diabetes, employment-sector and patient numbers were also collected. Chi-squared and Mann Whitney U tests were used to test differences between sub-groups. RESULTS: Three hundred and eleven podiatrists responded; 222 (71%) were female, 158 (51%) from the public sector and 11-15 years median experience. Participants reported treating a median of 21-30 diabetes patients each week, including 1-5 with foot ulcers. Overall, participants registered median scores of at least "very often" (>6) in their use of most items covering best practice diabetic foot management. Notable exceptions were: "never" (1 (1 - 3)) using total contact casting, "sometimes" (4 (2 - 5)) performing an ankle brachial index, "sometimes" (4 (1 - 6)) using University of Texas Wound Classification System, and "sometimes" (4 (3 - 6) referring to specialist multi-disciplinary foot teams. Public sector podiatrists reported higher use or access on all those items compared to private sector podiatrists (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first baseline information on Australian podiatrists' adherence to best practice diabetic foot guidelines. It appears podiatrists manage large caseloads of people with diabetes and are generally implementing best practice guidelines recommendations with some notable exceptions. Further studies are required to identify barriers to implementing these recommendations to ensure all Australians with diabetes have access to best practice care to prevent amputations.