IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i23-24p4212-4222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic review of peer education intervention programmes among individuals with type 2 diabetes

Author

Listed:
  • Tricia K Gatlin
  • Reimund Serafica
  • Michael Johnson

Abstract

Aims and objectives To systematically review published randomised controlled trials of peer education interventions among adults with type 2 diabetes. Background Systematic reviews have shown mixed results for peer support interventions to improve diabetes self‐management. Given the effectiveness of diabetes education by healthcare professionals, peer education interventions may be a useful alternative approach. This review addressed that gap. Design Systematic review. Method A systematic search of published randomised controlled trials between 2006–2016 was conducted using the keywords diabetes, type 2 diabetes, randomised controlled trials, self‐management, peer education and peer support. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Jadad scale. Results Seven studies were included in the final review, and the Jadad scores ranged from 8–10 of a possible 13 points. There was no consistent design, setting, or outcome measurement among the studies. There were two types of peer education interventions compared to traditional diabetes education: face‐to‐face or a combination of face‐to‐face and telephone/texting. The most common clinical outcome measure was HbA1c. Two of six studies showed statistically significant improvement in HbA1c between intervention and control groups. An increase in diabetes knowledge was also statistically significant in two of five studies. Conclusion Peer education could be successful in improving clinical outcomes. No evidence was found indicating that healthcare provider education was superior in regard to clinical knowledge or behavioural or psychological outcome measures than peer education. HbA1c was statistically significantly lower in some peer education groups compared to control groups. Relevance to Clinical Practice There is evidence that peer education can be useful in achieving positive clinical outcomes such as decreasing HbA1c levels and increasing diabetes knowledge. A certified diabetes educator or a trained healthcare professional should not be overlooked though when using peer educators.

Suggested Citation

  • Tricia K Gatlin & Reimund Serafica & Michael Johnson, 2017. "Systematic review of peer education intervention programmes among individuals with type 2 diabetes," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 4212-4222, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4212-4222
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13991
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13991?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carol Brownson & Michele Heisler, 2009. "The Role of Peer Support in Diabetes Care and Self-Management," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 2(1), pages 5-17, March.
    2. Wilson, W. & Pratt, C., 1987. "The impact of diabetes education and peer support upon weight and glycemic control of elderly persons with noninsulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM)," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 77(5), pages 634-635.
    3. Sokol, R. & Fisher, E., 2016. "Peer Support for the Hardly Reached: A Systematic Review," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1-8.
    4. Sokol, R. & Fisher, E., 2016. "Peer support for the hardly reached: A systematic review," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1-8.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Price & Siân de Bell & Naomi Shaw & Alison Bethel & Rob Anderson & Jo Thompson Coon, 2022. "What is the volume, diversity and nature of recent, robust evidence for the use of peer support in health and social care? An evidence and gap map," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), September.
    2. Mullard, Jordan C.R. & Kawalek, Jessica & Parkin, Amy & Rayner, Clare & Mir, Ghazala & Sivan, Manoj & Greenhalgh, Trisha, 2023. "Towards evidence-based and inclusive models of peer support for long covid: A hermeneutic systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    3. Keith James Topping, 2022. "Peer Education and Peer Counselling for Health and Well-Being: A Review of Reviews," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Zhihong Chen & Chaochuang Zhang & Guanhua Fan, 2020. "Interrelationship between Interpersonal Interaction Intensity and Health Self-Efficacy in People with Diabetes or Prediabetes on Online Diabetes Social Platforms: An In-Depth Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-21, July.
    5. Meng-Jung Wen & Martha Maurer & Luke Schwerer & Nassim Sarkarati & Ugboaku Maryann Egbujor & Jenna Nordin & Sharon D. Williams & Yao Liu & Olayinka O. Shiyanbola, 2022. "Perspectives on a Novel Culturally Tailored Diabetes Self-Management Program for African Americans: A Qualitative Study of Healthcare Professionals and Organizational Leaders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-15, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Price & Siân de Bell & Naomi Shaw & Alison Bethel & Rob Anderson & Jo Thompson Coon, 2022. "What is the volume, diversity and nature of recent, robust evidence for the use of peer support in health and social care? An evidence and gap map," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), September.
    2. Kia, Hannah & MacKinnon, Kinnon Ross & Abramovich, Alex & Bonato, Sarah, 2021. "Peer support as a protective factor against suicide in trans populations: A scoping review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    3. Laura K. Bech & Camilla Borch Jacobsen & Anne Sophie Mathiesen & Thordis Thomsen, 2019. "Preferring to manage by myself: A qualitative study of the perspectives of hardly reached people with type 2 diabetes on social support for diabetes management," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(9-10), pages 1889-1898, May.
    4. Reham Shalaby & Pamela Spurvey & Michelle Knox & Rebecca Rathwell & Wesley Vuong & Shireen Surood & Liana Urichuk & Mark Snaterse & Andrew J. Greenshaw & Xin-Min Li & Vincent I. O. Agyapong, 2022. "Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Measures for Patients Discharged from Acute Psychiatric Care: Four-Arm Peer and Text Messaging Support Controlled Observational Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Mullard, Jordan C.R. & Kawalek, Jessica & Parkin, Amy & Rayner, Clare & Mir, Ghazala & Sivan, Manoj & Greenhalgh, Trisha, 2023. "Towards evidence-based and inclusive models of peer support for long covid: A hermeneutic systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    6. Aliza Moledina & Olivia Magwood & Eric Agbata & Jui‐Hsia Hung & Ammar Saad & Kednapa Thavorn & Ginetta Salvalaggio & Gary Bloch & David Ponka & Tim Aubry & Claire Kendall & Kevin Pottie, 2021. "A comprehensive review of prioritised interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), June.
    7. Feldman, Matthew B. & Tran, Trang T. & Boucher, Lisa M. & Abdelqader, Faisal & Raker, Amanda R. & Hile, Stephen J., 2023. "A process and impact evaluation of a peer-led HIV self-management program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Wallace, Carolyn & Farmer, Jane & McCosker, Anthony, 2019. "Boundary spanning practices of community connectors for engaging ‘hardly reached’ people in health services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 366-373.
    9. Bourke, Lisa & Mitchell, Olivia & Mohamed Shaburdin, Zubaidah & Malatzky, Christina & Anam, Mujibul & Farmer, Jane, 2021. "Building readiness for inclusive practice in mainstream health services: A pre-inclusion framework to deconstruct exclusion," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    10. Jessica Alejandra Ruiz-Ramírez & Yury Arenis Olarte-Arias & Leonardo David Glasserman-Morales, 2021. "Educational Processes for Health and Disease Self-Management in Public Health: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-14, June.
    11. Brittany L. Smalls & Tiarney D. Ritchwood & Kinfe G. Bishu & Leonard E. Egede, 2020. "Racial/Ethnic Differences in Glycemic Control in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: United States 2003–2014," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-10, February.
    12. Carol Brownson & Michele Heisler, 2009. "The Role of Peer Support in Diabetes Care and Self-Management," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 2(1), pages 5-17, March.
    13. Zhihong Chen & Chaochuang Zhang & Guanhua Fan, 2020. "Interrelationship between Interpersonal Interaction Intensity and Health Self-Efficacy in People with Diabetes or Prediabetes on Online Diabetes Social Platforms: An In-Depth Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Marika Burda & Frans Horst & Marjan Akker & Alexander Stork & Ilse Mesters & Silvia Bours & Maarten Ploeg & Bjorn Winkens & Johannes Knottnerus, 2012. "Harvesting Experiential Expertise to Support Safe Driving for People with Diabetes Mellitus," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(4), pages 251-264, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4212-4222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.