↓ Skip to main content

The effects of self-efficacy enhancing program on foot self-care behaviour of older adults with diabetes: A randomised controlled trial in elderly care facility, Peninsular Malaysia

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effects of self-efficacy enhancing program on foot self-care behaviour of older adults with diabetes: A randomised controlled trial in elderly care facility, Peninsular Malaysia
Published in
PLoS ONE, March 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0192417
Pubmed ID
Authors

Siti Khuzaimah Ahmad Sharoni, Hejar Abdul Rahman, Halimatus Sakdiah Minhat, Sazlina Shariff-Ghazali, Mohd Hanafi Azman Ong

Abstract

Self-care behaviour is essential in preventing diabetes foot problems. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of health education programs based on the self-efficacy theory on foot self-care behaviour for older adults with diabetes. A randomised controlled trial was conducted for 12 weeks among older adults with diabetes in elderly care facility in Peninsular Malaysia. Six elderly care facility were randomly allocated by an independent person into two groups (intervention and control). The intervention group (three elderly care facility) received a health education program on foot self-care behaviour while the control group (three elderly care facility) received standard care. Participants were assessed at baseline, and at week-4 and week-12 follow-ups. The primary outcome was foot-self-care behaviour. Foot care self-efficacy (efficacy expectation), foot care outcome expectation, knowledge of foot care and quality of life were the secondary outcomes. Data were analysed with Mixed Design Analysis of Variance using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 22.0. 184 respondents were recruited but only 76 met the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. Foot self-care behaviour, foot care self-efficacy (efficacy expectation), foot care outcome expectation and knowledge of foot care improved in the intervention group compared to the control group (p < 0.05). However, some of these improvements did not significantly differ compared to the control group for QoL physical symptoms and QoL psychosocial functioning (p > 0.05). The self-efficacy enhancing program improved foot self-care behaviour with respect to the delivered program. It is expected that in the future, the self-efficacy theory can be incorporated into diabetes education to enhance foot self-care behaviour for elderly with diabetes living in other institutional care facilities. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12616000210471.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 23%
Unspecified 8 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 16 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 36%
Unspecified 10 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Psychology 5 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 5 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2018.
All research outputs
#10,410,449
of 11,741,833 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#110,531
of 129,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,401
of 269,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#2,337
of 2,726 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,741,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 129,523 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,726 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.