中华护理杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (19): 2420-2426.DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2024.19.017

• 综述 • 上一篇    下一篇

2型糖尿病患者健康素养干预的范围综述

马茹(), 郝妩媚, 李菁()   

  1. 100144 北京市 中国医学科学院北京协和医学院护理学院
  • 收稿日期:2024-03-07 出版日期:2024-10-10 发布日期:2024-10-14
  • 通讯作者: 李菁,E-mail:lijing@nursing.pumc.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:马茹:女,本科(硕士在读),E-mail:1472431518@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    北京协和医学院2022年中央高校教育教学改革专项资金支持项目(2022zlgc0126)

A scoping review of health literacy interventions for type 2 diabetes patients

MA Ru(), HAO Wumei, LI Jing()   

  • Received:2024-03-07 Online:2024-10-10 Published:2024-10-14

摘要:

目的 对2型糖尿病患者健康素养干预研究进行范围综述,为进一步完善2型糖尿病患者健康素养干预方案提供参考。 方法 以Nutbeam健康素养分层模型为理论依据及框架,通过范围综述的方法,检索中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方数据库、维普中文科技期刊数据库、PubMed、CINAHL、Medline、Web of Science数据库中关于2型糖尿病患者健康素养干预的相关研究。检索时限为建库至2023年11月21日,提取纳入文献的干预方法、干预内容、评价指标等相关信息。 结果 共纳入15篇文献,研究类型包括随机对照研究10篇、类实验研究4篇、研究方案1篇。4篇文献分别基于能力-机会-动机行为模型、计划行为理论、Nutbeam健康素养理论、社会认知理论与行为阶段改变模型进行干预;11篇文献的干预层次涉及功能性和互动性层面,较少涉及批判性层面;干预方法采用一对一干预、群组集中干预或一对一与群组集中结合干预;15篇文献的健康素养通过自制问卷、功能性、互动性和评判性健康素养量表、成人功能性健康素养测试量表系列问卷等量表进行测评。 结论 现有干预在提高功能性和互动性健康素养方面有显著作用,但批判性层面仍存在局限性,虽然能满足患者的基本层次需求,但不利于高层次能力的提升。因此,如何实现个性化层次干预、实现对批判性健康素养的干预及提升仍需要进一步探索。

关键词: 糖尿病, 2型, 健康素养, Nutbeam健康素养理论, 范围综述, 护理

Abstract:

Objective This scoping review evaluates health literacy interventions for Type 2 diabetes patients,so as to provide a reference for further improvement of health literacy intervention programmes for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods Based on the Nutbeam health literacy theory as the framework,the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database,CNKI,Wanfang Database,VIP Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database,PubMed,CINAHL,MEDLINE,and Web of Science were searched for related studies by scope review. The search time limit was from the establishment of the databases to November 21,2023,and the relevant information such as intervention methods,intervention content,evaluation indicators and other relevant information of the included literature was extracted. Results A total of 15 articles were included,including 10 randomized controlled studies,4 quasi-experimental studies,and 1 experimental plan. 4 studies were based on the ability,opportunity,motivation and behavior model,theory of planned behavior,Nutbeam health literacy theory and social cognitive theory and behavior stage change model,respectively. The intervention levels of the 11 studies involved functional and interactive levels,with less emphasis on the critical levels. The intervention methods were one-to-one intervention,group-focused intervention or one-to-one combined with group-focused intervention. The health literacy of 15 studies was evaluated by self-designed questionnaire,Functional,Interactive and Critical Health Literacy Scale,and Adult Functional Health Literacy Test Scale series questionnaire. Conclusion Existing interventions effectively enhance functional and interactive health literacy but have limitations in addressing critical literacy. While meeting basic needs,they do not significantly develop higher-level skills. Further research is needed to personalize interventions and improve critical health literacy.

Key words: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Health Literacy, Nutbeam Health Literacy Theory, Scoping Review, Nursing Care