The Relationship Between Nutrition Knowledge and Development of Complications in Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Open access

Abstract

Background and Aims: Diabetes is increasing rapidly in Turkey as most countries in the world. The prevention of complications which is the main aim in the treatment of diabetes can be accomplished partly with nutrition education. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between nutrition knowledge (NK) and complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Materials and Methods: 280 patients with 8-20 years of diabetes duration who applied to diet outpatient clinic were recruited. The questionnaire was prepared by the investigators to assess the NK. A score was calculated on the scale of 100. The complications were determined based on hospital records and patients’ selfreport. Results: 63.2% of participants were female and 36.8% were male. The most common complications in participants were retinopathy (56.1%) and neuropathy (42.9%). The mean NK score was 80.2±11.7. At least one complication was seen in 85.0% of the participants. There was no significant difference for having any complication in patients with adequate and inadequate NK. However the risk of diabetic foot, and coronary artery disease was significantly higher in women with inadequate NK. Conclusion: NK is quite high in long term diabetic patients. However no effect of the NK on the development of complications could be shown. The difference of effect between men and women could be due to the fact that food is mostly prepared by women thus not much chance of the knowledge of men to be reflected on his eating habits. The knowledge difference among female patients was seen in the results as; in women with inadequate NK, the prevalence of diabetic foot and CAD was significantly higher.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. World Health Organisation. Diabetes Fact Sheet 2016. Accessed at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs312/en/.

  • 2. International Diabetes Federation. World diabetes day 2015: Make healthy eating a right not a privilege 2015. Accessed at: http://www.idf.org/news/world-diabetes-day-2015-14-november.

  • 3. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas Fifth edition 2011. Accessed at: www.idf.org/diabetesatlas.

  • 4. Satman I Yılmaz T Sengül A et al. Populationbased study of diabetes and risk characteristics in Turkey: results of the Turkish Diabetes Epidemiology Study (TURDEP) . Diabetes Care 25: 1551-1556 2002.

  • 5. Satman I Omer B Tutuncu Y et al. Twelveyear trends in the prevalence and risk factors of diabetes and prediabetes in Turkish adults. Eur J Epidemiol 28: 169-180 2013.

  • 6. Burki T. Country in Focus: diabetes prevalence on the rise in Turkey. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 4: 391-392 2016.

  • 7. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration Sarwar N Gao P et al. Diabetes mellitus fasting blood glucose concentration and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet 375(9733): 2215-2222 2010.

  • 8. American Diabetes Association. Foundations of care and comprehensive medical evaluation. In: Standards of medical care in diabetes - 2016 Diabetes Care 39 [Suppl 1]: S23-S35 2016.

  • 9. American Diabetes Association. Nutrition principles and recommendations in diabetes. Diabetes Care 27: 36-46 2004.

  • 10. Franz MJ Bantle JP Beebe CA et al. Evidencebased nutrition principles and recommendations for the treatment and prevention of diabetes and related complications. Diabetes Care 25: 148-198 2002.

  • 11. Evert AB Boucher JL Cypress M Dunbar SA. Nutrition therapy recommendations for the management of adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 36: 3821-3842 2013.

  • 12. Fitzgerald N Damio G Segura-Perez S Perez- Escamilla R. Nutrition knowledge food label use and food intake patterns among latinas with and without type 2 diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc 108: 960-967 2008.

  • 13. Litwak L Goh S Hussein Z Malek R Prusty V Khamseh ME. Prevalence of diabetes complications in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and its association with baseline characteristics in the multinational A1chieve study. Diabetol Metab Syndr 5: 1-10 2013.

  • 14. Tanaka S Tanaka S Iımuro S. Predicting macro and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 36: 1193-1199 2013.

  • 15. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. in 2012. Diabetes Care 36: 1033-1046 2013.

  • 16. Bloom DE Ca ero Jané -Llopis E et al. The global economic burden of noncommunicable diseases. Geneva: World Economic Forum 2011. Accessed at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Harvard_HE_GlobalEconomicBurdenNonCommunicableDiseases_2011.pdf.

  • 17. Ghodsi R HamayeliMeharbani H Avand A Bordbar A Ahmadzadeh S. A study on the prevalence of diabetic complications in Fasa Diabetes Clinic. Asian J Med Pharm Res 4: 68-72 2014

  • 18. Gregg EW Li Y Wang J. Changes in diabetesrelated complications in the United States 1990-2010. N Engl J Med 370: 1514-1523 2014.

  • 19. Selvin E Parrinello CM Sacks DB. Trends in prevalence and control of diabetes in the United States 1988-1994 and 1999-2010. Ann Intern Med 160: 517-525 2014.

  • 20. Stem MS Blachley TS Shtein RM. Impact of diagnosing diabetic complications on future hemoglobin A1c levels. J Diabetes Complications 30: 323-328 2016.

  • 21. Ruta LM Magliano DJ Lemesurier R Taylor HR Zimmet PZ Shaw JE. Prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes in developing and developed countries. Diabet Med 30: 387-98 2013.

  • 22. Manaviat MR Afkhami M Shoja MR. Retinopathy and microalbuminuria in type II diabetic patients. BMC Ophthalmol 4: 9 2004.

  • 23. Chan J Gagliardino J Baik S Chantelot J. Multifaceted determinants for achieving glycemic control. The International Diabetes Management Practice Study (IDMPS). Diabetes Care 32: 277-233 2009.

  • 24. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Eng J Med 329: 977-986 1993.

  • 25. U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group (UKPDS). Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Lancet 352: 837-853 1998.

  • 26. Delahanty LM Halford BN. The role of diet behaviors in achieving improved glycemic control in intensively treated patients in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 16: 1453-1458 1993.

  • 27. Miller CK Edwards L Kissling G et al. Nutrition education improves metabolic outcomes among older adults with diabetes mellitus: Results from a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med 34: 252-259 2002.

  • 28. Zibaeenezhad MJ Aghasadeghi K Bagheri FZ et al. The effect of educational interventions on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Int Cardiovasc Res J Cilt 9: 17-21 2015.

  • 29. American Heart Association. The American Heart Association's diet and lifestyle recommendations. Accessed at: http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/Diet-and-Lifestyle-Recommendations_UCM_305855_Article.jsp#.V6EEZFd6N-U

  • 30. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. What are the signs and symptoms of coronary heart disease? Accessed at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/cad/signs.

  • 31. Nadeem M Ahmed SS Mansoor S Farooq S. Risk factors for coronary heart disease in patients below 45 years of age. Pak J Med Sci 29: 91-96 2013.

  • 32. McGill M. Foot-care education for people with diabetes: a major challenge. Diabetes Voice. 50: 36-39 2005.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.19

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.128
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.229

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 403 281 11
PDF Downloads 197 137 6