Explaining engagement in self-monitoring among participants of the DESMOND self-monitoring trial: a qualitative interview study

Eborall, Helen C., Dallosso, Helen M., McNicol, Sarah, Speight, Jane, Khunti, Kamlesh, Davies, Melanie J. and Heller, Simon R. 2015, Explaining engagement in self-monitoring among participants of the DESMOND self-monitoring trial: a qualitative interview study, Family practice, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 596-602, doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmv060.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Explaining engagement in self-monitoring among participants of the DESMOND self-monitoring trial: a qualitative interview study
Author(s) Eborall, Helen C.
Dallosso, Helen M.
McNicol, Sarah
Speight, JaneORCID iD for Speight, Jane orcid.org/0000-0002-1204-6896
Khunti, Kamlesh
Davies, Melanie J.
Heller, Simon R.
Journal name Family practice
Volume number 32
Issue number 5
Start page 596
End page 602
Total pages 7
Publisher Oxford University Press
Place of publication Oxford, Eng.
Publication date 2015-07-09
ISSN 1460-2229
Keyword(s) Blood glucose self-monitoring
Primary health care
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medicine, General & Internal
General & Internal Medicine
Summary BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (DESMOND) Self-monitoring Trial reported that people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes attending community-based structured education and randomized to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or urine monitoring had comparable improvements in biomedical outcomes, but differences in satisfaction with, and continued use of monitoring method, well-being and perceived threat from diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences of SMBG and urine monitoring following structured education. We specifically addressed the perceived usefulness of each monitoring method and the associated well-being. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 18 adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes participating in the DESMOND Self-monitoring Trial (SMBG, N=10; urine monitoring, N=8)~12 months into the trial. Analysis was informed by the constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Interviewees reported SMBG as accurate, convenient and useful. Declining use was explained by having established a pattern of managing blood glucose with less frequent monitoring or lack of feedback or encouragement from health care professionals. Many initially positive views of urine monitoring progressively changed due to perceived inaccuracy, leading some to switch to SMBG. Perceiving diabetes as less serious was attributable to lack of symptoms, treatment with diet alone and-in the urine-monitoring group-consistently negative readings. Urine monitoring also provided less visible evidence of diabetes and of the effect of behaviour on glucose. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the importance for professionals of considering patients' preferences when using self-monitoring technologies, including how these change over time, when supporting the self-care behaviours of people with type 2 diabetes.
Language eng
DOI 10.1093/fampra/cmv060
Field of Research 1117 Public Health And Health Services
170106 Health, Clinical and Counselling Psychology
Socio Economic Objective 920401 Behaviour and Health
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2015, Oxford University Press
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30080484

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Psychology
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 2 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 5 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 251 Abstract Views, 2 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 06 Jan 2016, 13:17:06 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.