Effect of Pharmacist Intervention to Self-Care Practices among Diabetes PatientsSyed Wasif Gillani1*, Syed Azhar Syed Sulaiman1, Mirza Baig2, Yelly Oktavia Sari3,4, Siti Maisharah Sheikh Ghadzi5, Sabariah Noor Haroon5 and Nur Hafzan Md Hanafiah5
- *Corresponding Author:
- Syed Wasif Gillani
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Universiti Sains Malaysia
Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: May 22, 2012; Accepted date: February 16, 2013; Published date: February 20, 2013
Citation: Gillani SW, Syed Sulaiman SA, Baig M, Sari YO, Sheikh Ghadzi SM, et al. (2013) Effect of Pharmacist Intervention to Self-Care Practices among Diabetes Patients. J Diabetes Metab 4:252. doi:10.4172/2155-6156.1000252
Copyright: © 2013 Gillani SW, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Our study objective was to evaluate the pharmacist interventions in providing patient home care. A 24-week longitudinal quasi-experimental-pre-test/post-test study design was used to assess the effectiveness of a diabetes education program to enhance self-care practices. Since this was a longitudinal study a 25% attrition rate was included in the calculation of sample size. Hence the sample size for the proposed study was 106 subjects with 53 subjects in each group. All analyses were done using SPSS version 18®. The level of significance was set at 0.05. The Research Ethics Committee of hospital and the Malaysian Medical Research and Ethics Committee approved the study. Of the 109 subjects who met the study-entry criteria, 3 subjects declined to participate due to lack of time and interest. There was no significant relationship between the demographic and clinical characteristic of participants who completed the study. During follow-up there was a statistically significant difference in Self Monitoring Blood Glucose (SMBG) practices between the intervention group (M=2.94, SD=2.25) and control group (M=0.47, SD=1.36; t(127.64)=-8.23, p ≤ 0.001) with moderate effect size (eta squared=0.06). Total physical activity was defined as the combination of non-leisure and leisure activities. There was a statistically significant difference in total physical levels between the intervention (M=14.01, SD=6.41) and control groups (13.21, SD=5.22; t(148.04)=-3.15, p=0.002) with no difference in the non-leisure activity (p=0.43). As for the control group, there was no significant difference in SMBG practices from baseline (M=0.70, SD=1.35) to follow-up (M= 0.47, SD=1.36, t(72)=0.97, P=0.34) and no relationship was found between the number of blood glucose tests done with demographic or clinical variables. Improvement of self-care practices that require lifestyle changes such as diet and increased in physical activities are problematic. This could be due to the complexity of these self-care practices that are socially and culturally constructed and often lifetime habits when compared to SMBG.