Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Feb;64(1):20-8.
doi: 10.1111/idj.12058. Epub 2013 Oct 14.

Health promotion for patients with diabetes: health coaching or formal health education?

Ayse Basak Cinar  1 , Lone Schou
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Health promotion for patients with diabetes: health coaching or formal health education?

Ayse Basak Cinar et al. Int Dent J. 2014 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if a Health Coaching (HC) approach compared with formal health education (HE) resulted in better health outcomes among type II diabetes (T2DM) patients in improving glycaemic control and oral health, by use of clinical and subjective outcome measures.

Methods: The study is part of a prospective intervention among randomly selected T2DM patients (n = 186) in Istanbul, Turkey. The data analysed were clinical [glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1C)), clinical attachment loss (CAL)] and psychological measures [tooth-brushing self efficacy (TBSES)]. Data were collected initially and at the end of intervention. Participants were allocated randomly to HC (intervention) (n = 77) and HE (control) (n = 111) groups.

Results: At baseline, there was no statistical difference between HC and HE regarding clinical and psychological measures, (P > 0.05). At post-intervention the HC group had significantly lower HBA(1C) and CAL (reduction: 7%, 56%) than the HE group (reduction: HbA(1C) 0%; CAL 26%), (P ≤ 0.01). Similarly, HC group, compared with HE group, had better TBSES (increase: 61% vs. 25%) and stress (reduction: 16% vs. 1%), (P ≤ 0.01). Among high-risk group patients, the HC patients had significant improvements compared with the HE group (reduction: HbA(1C) 16% vs. 5%; CAL 63% vs. 18%; stress 39% vs. 2%; fold increase: TBSES 6.6 vs. 3.6) (P ≤ 0.01).

Conclusions: The present findings may imply that HC has a significantly greater impact on better management of oral health and glycaemic control than HE. It is notable that the impact was more significant among high-risk group patients, thus HC may be recommended especially for high-risk group patients.

Keywords: Type II Diabetes Mellitus; health coaching; health education; health promotion; high risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Schematic representation of the recruitment of patients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. IDF. Diabetes and oral health Available from: http://www.idf.org/guidelines/diabetes-and-oral-health. [Accessed June 5 2013]; 2007
    1. Petersen PE. The World Oral Health Report 2003: continuous improvement of oral health in the 21st century – the approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Programme. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003;31(Suppl 1):3–23. - PubMed
    1. IDF. International Curriculum for Diabetes Health Professional Education Module. http://www.idf.org/webdata/docs/Curriculum_Final%20041108_EN.pdf. [Accessed June 5 2013]; 2008
    1. WHO. Available from: http://www.who.int/chp/chronic_disease_report/turkey.pdf. [Accessed June 5 2013]; 2010
    1. Cinar AB. University of Helsinki; Helsinki: 2008. Preadolescents and Their Mothers as Oral Health-Promoting Actors: Non-biologic Determinants of Oral Health among Turkish and Finnish Preadolescents. Doctorate Thesis.

Publication types

MeSH terms