Short Communication
Naglaa E L Mokadem and Rehab T
Abstract
Type II Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a growing public-health burden worldwide, particularly in developing countries. Lifestyle modification can prevent or delay the onset of type II DM at high-risk adults. Most lifestyle intervention findings are driven from western studies which might not be appropriate for different cultures. Culturally sensitive interventions tailored to meet the specific needs of people in a rural area will facilitate the implementation and sustainability of behavior changes. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of risk reduction intervention to reduce type II Diabetes Mellitus at high risk people in a rural area. A quasi experimental (Pre/post-test) design was used. A convenience sample of 70 patients with one or more risk factors of type II DM was recruited. This study was conducted at the outpatient clinics of Menoufia University Hospital at Shebein El- Kom City, Menofia Governorate, Egypt. Tools including: semi-structured demographic data sheet, The Australian Type II Diabetes Risk Assessment Tool and 24 Hours Dietary Recall Sheet. Culturally sensitive risk reduction intervention was tailored to meet the specific needs of at high risk people in the designated rural area. There was a statically significant difference in type II diabetes risk score pre and post intervention in the study group with a p value < 0.001. The lifestyle of people in developing country is different from industrialized developed countries, thus, developing preventive strategies to promote healthy lifestyles that are culturally appropriate and tailored for illiterate people with low socioeconomic status is crucial. Results Characteristics of the Sample The mean age of the participants in the control group was 37.85 ± 10.94 years old and the mean age of the participants in the study group was 43.02 ± 10.81. The majority of participants (88.6%, 80%) were female in both control and study group respectively and most of them (80%) were married in both groups. Concerning the educational level of the participants in the study group 51.4% were secondary school and 51.43% in the control group were university graduates and the majority of participants were working 85.7%, 80% in both groups. As regard to the monthly income of participants 62.86%, 54.29% of participants in control and study group respectively were enough and this determined from the patient’s perception. See table 1.