6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Mixed-Methods Randomized Evaluation of FAMS: A Mobile Phone-Delivered Intervention to Improve Family/Friend Involvement in Adults’ Type 2 Diabetes Self-Care

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Family and friends have both helpful and harmful effects on adults’ diabetes self-management. Family-focused Add-on to Motivate Self-care (FAMS) is a mobile phone-delivered intervention designed to improve family/friend involvement, self-efficacy, and self-care via monthly phone coaching, texts tailored to goals, and the option to invite a support person to receive texts.

          Purpose

          We sought to evaluate how FAMS was received by a diverse group of adults with Type 2 diabetes and if FAMS improved diabetes-specific family/friend involvement (increased helpful and reduced harmful), diabetes self-efficacy, and self-care (diet and physical activity). We also assessed if improvements in family/friend involvement mediated improvements in self-efficacy and self-care.

          Methods

          Participants were prospectively assigned to enhanced treatment as usual (control), an individualized text messaging intervention alone, or the individualized text messaging intervention plus FAMS for 6 months. Participants completed surveys at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and postintervention interviews. Between-group and multiple mediator analyses followed intention-to-treat principles.

          Results

          Retention, engagement, and fidelity were high. FAMS was well received and helped participants realize the value of involving family/friends in their care. Relative to control, FAMS participants had improved family/friend involvement, self-efficacy, and diet (but not physical activity) at 3 and 6 months (all ps < .05). Improvements in family/friend involvement mediated effects on self-efficacy and diet for FAMS participants but not for the individualized intervention group.

          Conclusions

          The promise of effectively engaging patients’ family and friends lies in sustained long-term behavior change. This work represents a first step toward this goal by demonstrating how content targeting helpful and harmful family/friend involvement can drive short-term effects.

          Trial Registration Number

          NCT02481596.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

            Research electronic data capture (REDCap) is a novel workflow methodology and software solution designed for rapid development and deployment of electronic data capture tools to support clinical and translational research. We present: (1) a brief description of the REDCap metadata-driven software toolset; (2) detail concerning the capture and use of study-related metadata from scientific research teams; (3) measures of impact for REDCap; (4) details concerning a consortium network of domestic and international institutions collaborating on the project; and (5) strengths and limitations of the REDCap system. REDCap is currently supporting 286 translational research projects in a growing collaborative network including 27 active partner institutions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity.

              Physical inactivity is a global concern, but diverse physical activity measures in use prevent international comparisons. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) was developed as an instrument for cross-national monitoring of physical activity and inactivity. Between 1997 and 1998, an International Consensus Group developed four long and four short forms of the IPAQ instruments (administered by telephone interview or self-administration, with two alternate reference periods, either the "last 7 d" or a "usual week" of recalled physical activity). During 2000, 14 centers from 12 countries collected reliability and/or validity data on at least two of the eight IPAQ instruments. Test-retest repeatability was assessed within the same week. Concurrent (inter-method) validity was assessed at the same administration, and criterion IPAQ validity was assessed against the CSA (now MTI) accelerometer. Spearman's correlation coefficients are reported, based on the total reported physical activity. Overall, the IPAQ questionnaires produced repeatable data (Spearman's rho clustered around 0.8), with comparable data from short and long forms. Criterion validity had a median rho of about 0.30, which was comparable to most other self-report validation studies. The "usual week" and "last 7 d" reference periods performed similarly, and the reliability of telephone administration was similar to the self-administered mode. The IPAQ instruments have acceptable measurement properties, at least as good as other established self-reports. Considering the diverse samples in this study, IPAQ has reasonable measurement properties for monitoring population levels of physical activity among 18- to 65-yr-old adults in diverse settings. The short IPAQ form "last 7 d recall" is recommended for national monitoring and the long form for research requiring more detailed assessment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Annals of Behavioral Medicine
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0883-6612
                1532-4796
                February 01 2021
                March 16 2021
                July 24 2020
                February 01 2021
                March 16 2021
                July 24 2020
                : 55
                : 2
                : 165-178
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37203, USA
                [2 ]Vanderbilt Center for Diabetes Translation Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
                [4 ]Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
                Article
                10.1093/abm/kaaa041
                32706852
                fd2057f6-93a0-45d8-ac47-a37fc91a9207
                © 2020

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                40
                1
                36
                0
                Smart Citations
                40
                1
                36
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content177

                Cited by14

                Most referenced authors759