One of the most serious complications of diabetes mellitus (DM) is neuropathy that affects the
skin sensitivity, causing decreased or even absent, facilitating the development of diabetic
foot. Such complications can be reduced with adherence to treatment rules of foot care for
diabetic patients. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of rules, justifications for
tracking and social reinforcement, and also compare the effects of a questionnaire
(Questionnaire 2 - Q2) specifying the behavior of foot care with effect from another
questionnaire ( Questionnaire 1 - Q1) without specifying such behaviors in six diabetic adults
through the following instruments: Interview Script Initial Script Initial Questions,
Observation Protocol feet, Questionnaire 2 - List of Behaviors Care Feet, Quiz 1 - Protocol
Questions about Behavior Care Feet, Rules and Foot Care Rules with Additional Justifications
for Foot Care. Seven meetings were held weekly, in which participants were exposed to
procedure A (Baseline [Q2] - Q1 - Q2) and procedure B (Baseline [Q1] - Q2 - Q1) in
Conditions 1 (social reinforcement), 2 (justification) and 3 (without social reinforcement /
without justification). The results showed that half of the participants reported receiving no
guidance foot care, four of the six had anatomical deformities in the feet, all had some aspect
circulatory and dermatological, and only one participant wearing proper footwear. Terms of
reported behaviors of foot care, it was found that participants exposed to Q2 (P11a, P21a and
P31a) had a larger number of reports than participants exposed to Q1 (P12b, P22b and P32b).
However, there is clear evidence in this study, treatment adherence. One fact that supports this
assertion is the fact that the number of reported behaviors of foot care, participants presented
P11a, P21a and P31a have decreased when these participants were exposed to Q1.
|
