We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Glycaemic index (GI) reflects the postprandial glucose response of carbohydrate-containing foods. A diet with lower GI may improve glycaemic control in people with diabetes. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the change in outcomes following a behavioural intervention which promoted lower-GI foods among adults with diabetes.
Design
A pre-test–post-test control group design was used with participants randomly assigned to an immediate (experimental) or delayed (control) treatment group. The intervention included a 9-week, group-based intervention about carbohydrate and the glycaemic index. Dietary, anthropometric and metabolic measures were obtained pre/post-intervention in both groups and at 18-week follow-up for the immediate group.
Setting
The study was conducted in a rural community in the north-eastern USA.
Subjects
Adults having type 2 diabetes mellitus for ≥1 year, aged 40–70 years and not requiring insulin therapy (n 109) were recruited.
Results
Following the intervention, mean dietary GI (P < 0·001), percentage of energy from total fat (P < 0·01) and total dietary fibre (P < 0·01) improved in the immediate compared with the delayed group. Mean BMI (P < 0·0001), fasting plasma glucose (P = 0·03), postprandial glucose (P = 0·02), fructosamine (P = 0·02) and insulin sensitivity factor (P = 0·04) also improved in the immediate group compared with the delayed group. Mean waist circumference among males (P < 0·01) and body weight among males and females (P < 0·01) were significantly different between treatment groups.
Conclusions
Educating clients about carbohydrate and the glycaemic index can improve dietary intake and health outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.
Traditionally, carbohydrate has been the largest contributor to energy intake among people with diabetes, yet different carbohydrate foods produce different glycaemic responses. Glycaemic load represents the total glycaemic effect of the diet and influences glycaemic control. Adequate self-efficacy and outcome expectations are needed to change carbohydrate intake and to evaluate relevant interventions. The purpose of this research was to develop and test instruments regarding self-efficacy and outcome expectations for the adoption of a lower glycaemic load diet.
Design
Participants completed each instrument at their convenience and mailed the instruments to the investigators.
Setting/subjects
A community sample of individuals 21–75 years of age with type 2 diabetes for ≥ 1 year (n = 108) was recruited.
Results
Principal components analysis revealed three factors on the self-efficacy questionnaire: glycaemic index, negative food selection and self-regulation efficacy which accounted for 62% of the variance in these items. The outcome expectations instrument yielded three factors: barriers to dietary change and glycaemic control, and family support expectations which accounted for 48% of the variance. Coefficient α for each construct was >0.70 and coefficient H for each construct was ≥ 0.80.
Conclusions
The two instruments developed for this study can provide important insights about the self-efficacy and outcome expectations regarding the quantity and quality of carbohydrate consumed and self-monitoring performed for diabetes management. Future research is needed to evaluate the relationship among these constructs, dietary intake and glycaemic control.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.