Openly accessible

Peer support to improve diabetes care: an implementation evaluation of the Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Program

Aziz, Zahra, Riddell, Michaela A., Absetz, Pilvikki, Brand, Margaret, Oldenburg, Brian, Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Project Investigators, Dunbar, James, Carter, Robert and Hagger, Virginia 2018, Peer support to improve diabetes care: an implementation evaluation of the Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Program, BMC public health, vol. 18, no. 1, doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5148-8.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
dunbar-peersupportto-2018.pdf Published version application/pdf 767.01KB 2

Title Peer support to improve diabetes care: an implementation evaluation of the Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Program
Author(s) Aziz, Zahra
Riddell, Michaela A.
Absetz, Pilvikki
Brand, Margaret
Oldenburg, Brian
Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Project Investigators
Dunbar, JamesORCID iD for Dunbar, James orcid.org/0000-0003-0866-4365
Carter, RobertORCID iD for Carter, Robert orcid.org/0000-0002-1586-5619
Hagger, VirginiaORCID iD for Hagger, Virginia orcid.org/0000-0003-3845-2814
Journal name BMC public health
Volume number 18
Issue number 1
Article ID 262
Total pages 12
Publisher BioMed Central
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2018-02-17
ISSN 1471-2458
Keyword(s) Implementation evaluation
PIPE impact metric
Participant-level factors
Peer support
Provider-level factors
Public health impact
RE-AIM framework
Self-management
Type 2 diabetes
Adult
Aged
Cluster Analysis
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
Female
Group Processes
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Motivation
Peer Group
Program Evaluation
Self Care
Self-Help Groups
Victoria
Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Project Investigators
Summary BACKGROUND: Several studies have now demonstrated the benefits of peer support in promoting diabetes control. The aim of this study is to evaluate the implementation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of a group-based, peer support program to improve diabetes self-management and thereby, diabetes control in people with Type 2 Diabetes in Victoria, Australia.

METHODS: The intervention program was designed to address four key peer support functions i.e. 1) assistance in daily management, 2) social and emotional support, 3) regular linkage to clinical care, and 4) ongoing and sustained support to assist with the lifelong needs of diabetes self-care management. The intervention participants attended monthly group meetings facilitated by a trained peer leader for 12 months. Data was collected on the intervention's reach, participation, implementation fidelity, groups' effectiveness and participants' perceived support and satisfaction with the intervention. The RE-AIM and PIPE frameworks were used to guide this evaluation.

RESULTS: The trial reached a high proportion (79%) of its target population through mailed invitations. Out of a total of 441 eligible individuals, 273 (61.9%) were willing to participate. The intervention fidelity was high (92.7%). The proportion of successful participants who demonstrated a reduction in 5 years cardiovascular disease risk score was 65.1 and 44.8% in the intervention and control arm respectively. Ninety-four percent (94%) of the intervention participants stated that the program helped them manage their diabetes on a day to day basis. Overall, attending monthly group meetings provided 'a lot of support' to 57% and 'moderate' support to 34% of the participants.

CONCLUSION: Peer support programs are feasible, acceptable and can be used to supplement treatment for patients motivated to improve behaviours related to diabetes. However, program planners need to focus on the participation component in designing future programs. The use of two evaluation frameworks allowed a comprehensive evaluation of the trial from the provider-, participant- and public health perspective. The learnings gained from this evaluation will guide and improve future implementation by improving program feasibility for adoption and acceptability among participants, and will ultimately increase the likelihood of program effectiveness for the participants.
Language eng
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5148-8
Field of Research 111799 Public Health and Health Services not elsewhere classified
1117 Public Health And Health Services
Socio Economic Objective 920499 Public Health (excl. Specific Population Health) not elsewhere classified
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2018, The Authors
Free to Read? Yes
Use Rights Creative Commons Attribution licence
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30107095

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

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.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 17 Abstract Views, 3 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 04 Apr 2018, 11:49:34 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.