In the Diabetes Initiative of The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, an ecological perspective helped identify the following key resources and supports for self-management (RSSM): individualized assessment, collaborative goal setting, skills enhancement, follow-up and support, access to resources, and continuity of quality clinical care. These RSSM reflect the grounding of diabetes self-management in the context of social and environmental influences. Research supports the value of each of these key resources and supports. Differences among self-management interventions may be seen as complementary, rather than conflicting, ways of providing RSSM. This way of understanding differences among interventions may aid development of varied programs to reach diverse audiences. In contrast to the "5 A's" model of key provider services (Assess, Advise, Agree, Assist, and Arrange), RSSM articulate self-management from the perspective of individuals' needs. Both approaches emphasize identification of goals, teaching of skills, and facilitation and reinforcement of the use of those skills.

No abstract

Self-management programs for type 2 diabetes are cost-effective from a health systems perspective when the cost savings due to reductions in long-term complications are recognized. These findings may justify increased reimbursement for effective self-management programs in diverse settings.

BackgroundEvidence-based public health gives public health practitioners the tools they need to make choices based on the best and most current evidence. An evidence-based public health training course developed in 1997 by the Prevention Research Center in St. Louis has been taught by a transdisciplinary team multiple times with positive results. In order to scale up evidence-based practices, a train-the-trainer initiative was launched in 2010.MethodsThis study examines the outcomes achieved among participants of courses led by trained state-level faculty. Participants from trainee-led courses in four states (Indiana, Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas) over three years were asked to complete an online survey. Attempts were made to contact 317 past participants. One-hundred forty-four (50.9 %) reachable participants were included in analysis. Outcomes measured include frequency of use of materials, resources, and other skills or tools from the course; reasons for not using the materials and resources; and benefits from attending the course. Survey responses were tabulated and compared using Chi-square tests.ResultsAmong the most commonly reported benefits, 88 % of respondents agreed that they acquired knowledge about a new subject, 85 % saw applications for the knowledge to their work, and 78 % agreed the course also improved abilities to make scientifically informed decisions at work. The most commonly reported reasons for not using course content as much as intended included not having enough time to implement evidence-based approaches (42 %); other staff/peers lack training (34 %); and not enough funding for continued training (34 %). The study findings suggest that utilization of course materials and teachings remains relatively high across practitioner groups, whether they were taught by the original trainers or by state-based trainers.ConclusionsThe findings of this study suggest that train-the-trainer is an effective method for broadly disseminating evidence-based public health principles. Train-the-trainer is less costly than the traditional method and allows for courses to be tailored to local issues, thus making it a viable approach to dissemination and scale up of new public health practices.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1224-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.