Back to all available

Magnitude of social support and associated factors among diabetic patients in public hospitals of Gofa Zone, Southern Ethiopia

diabetes-and-endocrinology
global-health
public-health

Abstract

Social support is one of the psychosocial elements essential for compliance with self-care practices and helps patients manage their disease successfully. In Ethiopia, only 2.5% of diabetes mellitus (DM) patients receive adequate social support. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the magnitude of social support and its associated factors among DM patients treated in public hospitals of the Gofa Zone, Southern Ethiopia.

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 422 diabetic patients selected through simple random sampling from public hospitals in the Gofa Zone. Data were collected using a structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire and checklists. The data were cleaned and entered into EpiData version 3.1, then exported to SPSS version 25 for analysis. Variables with a p-value < 0.2 in the bivariable analysis were included in the multivariable logistic regression model. Variables with a p-value < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

A total of 407 DM patients participated, yielding a response rate of 96.4%. The magnitude of social support was found to be 48.6% (95% CI: 44.9–52.3). Factors significantly associated with social support included engaging in physical exercise (AOR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.44–5.61), presence of an acute medical condition (AOR = 5.69, 95% CI: 2.23–14.51), following a healthful eating plan (AOR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.47–5.89), adherence to treatment (AOR = 5.55, 95% CI: 3.04–10.14), being a member of a DM association (AOR = 6.86, 95% CI: 3.92–11.98), and having controlled fasting blood sugar (AOR = 3.46, 95% CI: 1.22–9.79).


Although social support improves medical follow-up and lifestyle behaviors, most diabetic patients in the study area had insufficient support. Physical activity, acute illness, dietary adherence, treatment compliance, DM association membership, and blood sugar control were all positively associated with receiving social support. Therefore, all relevant stakeholders should work to strengthen the Ethiopian Diabetic People’s Association and promote supportive environments for diabetic patients.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].