Search

Introduction: Controlling blood sugar can be done by dietary adherence of DM. To control glycemic, it is necessary to have motivation and health locus of control to face boredom in dietary adherence of DM. The aim was to analyse the correlation between motivation and health locus of control with dietary adherence of DM.Methods: Cross-sectional design was conducted and involved 106 respondents from five public health centers in Surabaya selected by random sampling. Data were collected by questionnaire Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ), Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales” (MHLC), and Diet Adherence. The analysis data was using statistical Spearman rho (α ≤ 0.05).Results: There was no correlation between motivation and dietary adherence (p=0.178), and there was a correlation between health locus of control with dietary adherence (p = 0.002).Conclusion: According to analysis, it can be concluded that motivation is influenced by many things to the role the forming of patient behavior in dietary adherence of DM while health locus of control has an influence to dietary adherence of DM. Because of that, it is necessary to increase the factor that influences the behavior of DM control. One of it is health locus of control. So that the glycemic control with dietary adherence of DM can increase and be better.

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic disease with many complications. Self-efficacy is a psychosocial aspects refer to patient’s belief about their ability to do Diabetes managements. Self-efficacy can be enhanced by providing a mutual support from other Diabetic patients. This study aimed to analyze the influence of peer group support on self-efficacy, glicemic control and self-care activities of Diabetic patients. Method: This research was a pre-experimental with one-group pre-post test design and was evolved 29 respondents. Peer Group Support indicators were checking in, presenting problems, clarifying issues, sharing experiences, action planning and checking out. Implementation of peer group support activity was 60 minutes meeting, once a week for totally 6 weeks. The datas were analyzed by Wilcoxon signed rank test and Spearman’s Rho test with significance values p≤ 0.05. Result: Self efficacy, self care activities, and blood glucose level were increased (p=0.000). Discussion: Peer group support was recommended to enhance self-efficacy and self-management of diabetic patients. Further research is needed about health promotion for improving self-efficacy.Keywords: peer group support, self-efficacy, glicemic control, self care activities, Diabetes Mellitus (DM)

Context Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is associated with a higher intestinal expression of the glucose transporters sodium/glucose cotransporter 1 (SGLT-1) and glucose transporter 2 (GLUT-2). It is currently unsettled whether prediabetes conditions characterized by postprandial hyperglycemia, such as impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and normal glucose tolerance (NGT) with 1-hour postload glucose ≥155 mg/dL (8.6 mmol/L) (NGT-1h-high) are associated with increased expression of these glucose carriers in the intestine. Objective We evaluated whether duodenal abundance of SGLT-1 and GLUT-2 is augmented in subjects with IGT and NGT-1h-high, in comparison with subjects with NGT and 1-hour postload glucose ˂155 mg/dL (NGT-1h-low). Design Cross-sectional. Patients A total of 54 individuals underwent an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Main Outcome Measures Duodenal SGLT-1 and GLUT-2 protein and messenger RNA levels were assessed by Western blot and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, respectively. Results Of the 54 subjects examined, 18 had NGT-1h-low, 12 had NGT-1h-high, 12 had IGT, and 12 had T2DM. Duodenal SGLT-1 protein and messenger RNA levels were significantly higher in individuals with NGT-1h-high, IGT, or T2DM in comparison with NGT-1h-low subjects. GLUT-2 abundance was higher in individuals with T2DM in comparison with NGT-1h-low subjects; no substantial increase in GLUT-2 expression was observed in NGT-1h-high or IGT individuals. Univariate correlations showed that duodenal SGLT-1 abundance was positively correlated with 1-hour postload plasma glucose levels (r = 0.44; P = 0.003) but not with fasting or 2-hour postload glucose levels. Conclusions Duodenal SGLT-1 expression is increased in individuals with 1-hour postload hyperglycemia or IGT, as well as in subjects with T2DM, and it positively correlates with early postload glucose excursion.

There is a very well known correlation between diabetes and cardiovascular disease but many health care professionals are just concerned with glycemic control, ignoring the paramount importance of controlling other risk factors involved in the pathogenesis of serious cardiovascular diseases. This Position Statement from the Brazilian Diabetes Society was developed to promote increased awareness in relation to six crucial topics dealing with diabetes and cardiovascular disease: Glicemic Control, Cardiovascular Risk Stratification and Screening Coronary Artery Disease, Treatment of Dyslipidemia, Hypertension, Antiplatelet Therapy and Myocardial Revascularization. The issue of what would be the best algorithm for the use of statins in diabetic patients received a special attention and a new Brazilian algorithm was developed by our editorial committee. This document contains 38 recommendations which were classified by their levels of evidence (A, B, C and D). The Editorial Committee included 22 specialists with recognized expertise in diabetes and cardiology.

Para verificar a variabilidade do controle glicêmico em um estudo não controlado de diabéticos durante um ano de acompanhamento, nós avaliamos retrospectivamente 113 pacientes diabéticos. Com os valores das HBA1c (hemoglobina glicada) dosadas em 1998 calculamos um índice de controle que foi associado à idade, duração do diabetes, IMC e dose de insulina. A HBA1c foi maior em pacientes DM1 do que DM2, respectivamente [7,9 (4,4-13,3) vs. 7,0 (4,4-13,4)%; p= 0,007]. Nos 90 pacientes com no mínimo duas HBA1c, 68 (75,6%) mantiveram o controle: 51 (76,1%) em bom, 8 (11,1%) em regular e 9 (11,9%) em péssimo controle. Nenhum manteve todas as HBA1c na faixa da normalidade, sendo que 26 pacientes (28,9%) tiveram pelo menos uma HBA1c normal. No grupo geral, 44 pacientes (48,9%) apresentaram aumento da HBA1c, 41 (45,6%) diminuição e 5 pacientes (5,6%) mantiveram o mesmo valor, sem diferença entre DM1 e DM2 (p= 0,77). Observamos diferença na HBA1c e tempo de duração de diabetes entre os pacientes com DM2 que tratavam com dieta, hipoglicemiante oral, terapia combinada e monoterapia com insulina, respectivamente (5,4±0,5 vs. 6,3±1,3 vs. 7,6±1,4 vs. 8,4±2,0%; p= 0,001) e (8,5±9,9 vs. 5,3±4,2 vs. 14,1±9,6 vs. 16,9±8,1 anos; p= 0,003). O coeficiente de variação intraindividual da HBA1c foi de 11,6±7,4% (p= 0,0000), sendo de 12,8±7,6% (p= 0,0000) em DM1 e 10,4±7,2% em DM2 (p= 0,0000) sem diferença entre ambos. Concluímos que em nossa amostra a maioria dos pacientes manteve um bom controle apesar da variabilidade intraindividual e da dificuldade em normalizar os níveis de HBA1c. To evaluate the variability of glicemic control in diabetic patients followed during one year, we conducted a retrospective study in which the record data of 113 diabetic patients were analyzed. The value of HBA1c (glycated hemoglobin) measured during a year were registered and an index of glicemic control was calculated. This index was associated with duration of diabetes, BMI and dose of insulin. HBA1c were higher in type 1 diabetes than type 2, respectively, [7.9 (4.4-13.3) vs. 7.0 (4.4-13.4)%; p= 0.007]. In 90 patients with at least two HBA1c measurements, 68 (75.6%) had no change in glicemic control: 51 (76.1%) had good, 8 (11.1%) regular and 9 (11.9%) poor control. None of them sustained all the HBA1c in the normal range: 26 (28.9%) had at least one normal HBA1c value. In general group, 44 patients (48.9%) showed increase, 41 (45.6%) decreased and 5 (5.6%) remained with the same level of HBA1c, without difference between DM1 and DM2 (p= 0,77). A difference in HBA1c and diabetes duration among patients with DM2 treated with diet, oral hipoglycemic agents, combined therapy and monotherapy with insulin, was noted respectively (5.4±0.5 vs. 6.3±1.3 vs. 7.6±1.4 vs. 8.4±2.0%; p= 0.001) and (8.5±9.9 vs. 5.3±4.2 vs. 14.1±9.6 vs. 16.9±8.1 years; p= 0,003). The intraindividual coefficient of variation of HBA1c was 11.6±7.4% (p= 0.0000) being 12.8±7.6 (p= 0.0000) in type 1 and 10.4±7.2% in type 2 (p= 0.0000) without difference between both groups. In conclusion: the majority of the patients in our study maintained a good control despite the intraindividual variability of HBA1c and the difficulty to keeping it in the normal range.