Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Prim Care Diabetes. 2015 Apr;9(2):155-62. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2014.05.004. Epub 2014 Jun 12.

A comparison of two methods of foot health education: the Fremantle Diabetes Study Phase II.

Author information

1
School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Fremantle Hospital, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia; Podiatric Medicine Unit, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
2
Diabetes WA, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia.
3
Podiatric Medicine Unit, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
4
School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Fremantle Hospital, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.
5
School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Fremantle Hospital, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia. Electronic address: tim.davis@uwa.edu.au.

Abstract

AIMS:

To compare the effectiveness of two different methods of education on foot health, behaviours and attitudes in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS:

Community-based patients were consecutively allocated to written education (Group A) or an interactive educator-led session (Group B). A quantitative Foot Score (maximum 90 points score based on severity of treatable pathology), the Nottingham Assessment of Functional Foot Care (NAFFC) survey score (maximum 30 points reflecting frequency of foot care behaviours) and a 6-question survey of attitudes to foot complications were administered at baseline and 3 months.

RESULTS:

154 patients (mean±SD age 68±10 years, 59.7% males, median [interquartile range] diabetes duration 11.5 [5.6-18.9] years) were recruited. There was a greater change (Δ) in Foot Score from baseline to 3 months in Group A (8.3±3.6, Δ-1.8 (95% CI: -2.4 to -1.2) vs Group B (6.8±2.6, Δ-0.1 (-0.7 to 0.4); P<0.001), but no change in NAFFC survey score in either group (P=0.13). In the attitudes survey, Group B felt they better understood how to prevent foot complications than Group A after education (P=0.031).

CONCLUSIONS:

Written information was more effective at improving foot health while interactive education improved confidence in undertaking preventive measures, suggesting that the most effective foot care education should include both components.

KEYWORDS:

Education; Foot health; Intervention; Type 2 diabetes

PMID:
24929632
DOI:
10.1016/j.pcd.2014.05.004
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center