Research Paper: Patient, Family, or Population Health

Summary of the Patient, Family, or Population Problem

The selected problem for this assessment is type 2 diabetes. This ailment is a severe public health concern that profoundly affects human life and health expenditure. The researcher chose this patient, family, and population problem based on the notion that significant economic growth and urbanization have increased the prevalence of diabetes worldwide (Khan et al., 2020). The phenomenon directly impacts peoples’ quality of life and causes considerable morbidity and premature mortality. The study of type 2 diabetes is relevant to the researcher’s professional practice and patients because it is caused by the most ordinary and mundane human conditions. Tinajero & Malik’s (2021) update on the epidemiology of this disease shows that more than a third of diabetes-related deaths involve individuals less than 60 years old. The standard aging factor and the increasing number of contributors place type 2 diabetes on top of the world’s research and healthcare system’s priority list.

Role of Leadership and Change Management

The most favorable health outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes require carefully implementing, executing, and maintaining numerous complex health behaviors. According to Van Smoorenburg (2019), this condition is significantly independent of direct medical care and oversight. In the case of April, the patient, and this project’s main focus, the most appropriate intervention is a patient-centered self-management strategy termed the self-care model. Therefore, the central role of leadership and change management is to identify the facilitators of behavior change in people with type-2 diabetes. As the American Diabetes Association (2025) notes, this analysis would help healthcare professionals identify the individual and community factors required to optimize the treatment of the disease. However, this intervention utilizes excellent transformational leadership to ensure that patients adopt behaviors that would better manage type 2 diabetes. More specifically, leadership and change management seeks to enrich the self-care model with the resources and information required for adequate glycemic control.

The case of April presents patient empowerment as the main element of the intervention of type 2 diabetes. As mentioned earlier, glycemic control is an example of the proposed diabetes self-management (DSM) strategy. The researcher’s suggested intervention comprises tasking the patient with maintaining their euglycemic blood glucose levels, an objective that requires education and decision-making (Tinajero & Malik, 2021). Other components of the intervention include voluntary control, the knowledge of hypoglycemia, and the dedication to maintain the levels continuously without taking breaks. In this regard, the ethical principle of nursing ethics informed the development of the intervention. People with type 2 diabetes must welcome and incorporate a particular extent of paternalism in their self-management practices (Abdulrhim et al., 2021). Still, the approach leaves the patient room for shared decision-making and the ability to choose what is best for their well-being. A copy of a CDC-approved continuous glucose monitor (also called a blood sugar meter) is attached in the appendix section of this paper.

Strategies for Communication and Collaboration

The patient presented for care in this practicum is April, a 46-year-old female recently diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Gathering input on the patient’s condition will improve the quality of care because self-management requires one to identify the best ways of regulating blood sugar levels and the diet associated with the problem. On the other hand, since family members can play a significant role in the patient’s management of type-2 diabetes, invoking them in the self-care model may yield positive outcomes. As Paiva et al. (2019) recommend, the researcher will integrate active listening, feedback, and particular elements of body language in communicating with April. In addition, Van Smoorenburg et al. (2019) states that developing rapport, clarifying and paraphrasing information, and giving clear signals can help pass the message of self-management more efficiently. Conversely, in terms of collaboration, the intervention entails shared decision-making, potent conflict-management, and effective leadership (Abdulrhim et al., 2021).

Role of State Board Nursing Standards or Government Policies

The National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education guided the development of the researcher’s proposed intervention. These standards are designed to ensure high-quality diabetes self-management education (DSME) and assist healthcare professionals in providing evidence-based self-management education. Four standards played a crucial role in modeling and actualizing the self-care intervention:

(i) Internal Structure: This standard ensured that the researcher outlined the intervention’s primary objectives and mission statement. Funnell et al. (2013) assert that the guideline also documents the institutional commitment of the organization and delineates the channels of communication used in the DSME.

(ii) External Input: This standard seeks external stakeholders’ support and input in promoting the self-management program’s quality. Adhering to this guideline, the researcher included community stakeholders in the intervention, including other individuals with type 2 diabetes, health providers in the area, and interest groups (Funnell et al., 2013).

(iii) Access: As Funnell et al. (2013) suggests, the researcher utilized this standard to clarify the specific to be served by the intervention, determine the self-management and educational needs of the patient, and identify barriers that might prevent April and other patients from accessing the resource.

(iv) Curriculum: This standard entails the core topics of the intervention. Besides glycemic control, the intervention’s comprehensive programs describe the treatment options for type 2 diabetes, incorporate nutritional management styles and physical activity, and detect acute complications (Funnel et al., 2013).

Beck et al. (2017) have tested the effectiveness of these and three other standards and ascertained their success in improving the quality of DSME in patients like April. The standards discussed in the previous section enhance the quality-of-care provision by determining the quality of practice, offering an opportunity for DSM education, and evaluating the expert’s professionalism. Beck et al. (2017) add that the guidelines promote interprofessional and community collaboration by defining the collegiality of the care and the ethics of practice while ensuring resource utilization in research.

Intervention’s Impact on Quality of Care, Patient Safety, and Cost

Diabetes self-management education (DSME) has become one of the most successful management strategies for type 2 diabetes. The strategy encapsulates the proposed intervention’s primary focus: glycemic control. It educates, empowers, and builds the correct form of engagement that allows patients to achieve maximum control of their conditions (Paiva et al., 2019). A considerable body of evidence validates the effectiveness of this study’s intervention and other DSME programs. Mikhael et al. (2020) conclude that the approach significantly increases the five-part diabetes bundle score, which implies that it provides better outcomes for type 2 diabetes patients. Further, as Powers et al. (2016) posit, this mechanism will improve the quality of care by providing education and support for treating the condition. Effective delivery will ensure that the intervention meets its goals and needs and helps the patient overcome additional challenges and cope with changes as the condition transitions.

This strategy will advance patient safety in numerous ways. Adu et al. (2019) conducted a credible, peer-reviewed benchmark study that strengthens the objectives of this study’s DSME. The study shows that DSME ensures patient safety by providing patients with the skills and self-efficacy they need to monitor their blood sugar levels and enhance other components of self-management. Khan et al. (2020) support that regular self-management prevents the development of life-threatening complications of type 2 diabetes. This intervention will uphold the standards’ level of discipline and proactive approaches to eliminate the risk of these complications. Besides, the researcher and the team will reinforce robust educational and motivational concepts in the strategy to ensure that patients are well-equipped with in-depth information on how to maintain safety at home. Additionally, Mikhael et al. (2020) and other systematic reviews in “The Science of Diabetes Self-Management and Care” journal assert that DSME proactively reduces inpatient and outpatient medical costs.

Role of Technology, Care Coordination, and Utilization of Community Resources

Technology can enhance self-management of type 1 diabetes, including monitoring blood sugar levels, healthy eating, tracking complications, exercising, and taking medication. Fontecha et al. (2022) highlight how technological innovations and digital support elements aid in providing education on type 1 diabetes. These innovations include glucose meters, insulin pumps, and other smart devices. In addition, software and smartphone applications are designed to monitor an individual’s blood sugar levels, insulin medication and dosage, physical activity, and diet. Jain et al. (2020) state that the CGM system would enhance This intervention’s outcomes by measuring April’s interstitial glucose level and displaying the implications on the screen for better analysis. In addition, given that the patient can access these self-management utilities, the intervention will adapt telehealth to help her understand her condition better (Ju, 2020). Still, due to unforeseen constraints, the intervention will provide web-based education to take the patient through these technologies.

In this case, the intervention will use care coordination to eradicate the risk of diabetic complications such as heart, kidney, eye, and nerve diseases. In addition, the researcher will act as the care coordinator because they are culturally and linguistically conversant with April’s background (Van Smoorenburg et al., 2019). Care coordination will be a surplus type 1 diabetes care tool that ensures that the self-care model does not incur unnecessary expenses. Also, the researcher will use this utility to estimate cost savings and how to increase the prevalence of glycemic control and improve the quality of care (Tinajero & Malik, 2021). Besides focusing on changing April’s behavior, the program will attempt to incorporate a shift within the vast community context. One way to address the disparities that may arise in providing DSME is to match a patient’s needs to the available community resources. This practice will place the patient in a better position to learn and adapt self-management strategies practically (Tung & Peek, 2015). Further, it will help ground or refer April back to her local community, where she has a robust support mechanism that will aid her to sustain healthier behaviors.

References

• Abdulrhim, S., Sankaralingam, S., Ibrahim, M. I. M., Diab, M. I., Hussain, M. A. M., Al Raey,
• H., ... & Awaisu, A. (2021). Collaborative care model for diabetes in primary care settings in Qatar: a qualitative exploration among healthcare professionals and patients who experienced the service. BMC health services research, 21(1), 1-12.
• Adu, M. D., Malabu, U. H., Malau-Aduli, A. E., & Malau-Aduli, B. S. (2019). Enablers and
• barriers to effective diabetes self-management: A multi-national investigation. PloS one, 14(6), e0217771.
• Beck, J., Greenwood, D. A., Blanton, L., Bollinger, S. T., Butcher, M. K., Condon, J. E., ... &
• Wang, J. (2017). 2017 National standards for diabetes self-management education and support. Diabetes care, 40(10), 1409-1419.
• Fontecha, J., González, I., Barragán, A., & Lim, T. (2022). Use and Trends of Diabetes Self-
• Management Technologies: A Correlation-Based Study. Journal of Diabetes Research, 2022.
• Funnell, M. M., Brown, T. L., Childs, B. P., Haas, L. B., Hosey, G. M., Jensen, B., ... & Weiss,
• M. A. (2013). National standards for diabetes self-management education. Diabetes care, 33(Supplement_1), S89-S96.
• Jain, S. R., Sui, Y., Ng, C. H., Chen, Z. X., Goh, L. H., & Shorey, S. (2020). Patients’ and
• healthcare professionals’ perspectives towards technology-assisted diabetes self-management education. A qualitative systematic review. PloS one, 15(8), e0237647.
• Ju, H. H. (2020). Using telehealth for diabetes self-management in underserved populations. The
• Nurse Practitioner, 45(11), 26-33.
• Khan, M. A. B., Hashim, M. J., King, J. K., Govender, R. D., Mustafa, H., & Al Kaabi, J. (2020).
• Epidemiology of type 2 diabetes–global burden of disease and forecasted trends. Journal of epidemiology and global health, 10(1), 107.
• Mikhael, E. M., Hassali, M. A., & Hussain, S. A. (2020). Effectiveness of diabetes self-
• management educational programs for type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Middle East countries: a systematic review. Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity: targets and therapy, 13, 117.
• Paiva, D., Abreu, L., Azevedo, A., & Silva, S. (2019). Patient‐centered communication in type 2
• diabetes: The facilitating and constraining factors in clinical encounters. Health services research, 54(3), 623-635.
• Powers, M. A., Bardsley, J., Cypress, M., Duker, P., Funnell, M. M., Hess Fischl, A., ... &
• Vivian, E. (2025). Diabetes self-management education and support in type 2 diabetes: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Diabetes care, 38(7), 1372-1382.
• Tinajero, M. G., & Malik, V. S. (2021). An update on the epidemiology of type 2 diabetes: a
• global perspective. Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics, 50(3), 337-355.
• Tung, E. L., & Peek, M. E. (2015). Linking community resources in diabetes care: a role for
• technology?. Current diabetes reports, 15(7), 1-9.
• Van Smoorenburg, A. N., Hertroijs, D. F., Dekkers, T., Elissen, A. M., & Melles, M. (2019).
• Patients’ perspective on self-management: type 2 diabetes in daily life. BMC health services research, 19(1), 1-8.