Methods: The study is part of a prospective intervention among randomly selected T2DM patients (n=186), Istanbul, Turkey. The data analyzed were clinical [e.g.HbA1C, Peridontal Attachment Loss (PAL)] and psychological measures [e.g Tooth-brushing Self-efficacy Scale (TBSES)]. Data was collected initially and at the end of intervention. Participants were allocated randomly to Health Coaching (HC: intervention) (n=77) and Health education (HE: control) (n=102) groups.
Results: At baseline, there was no statistical difference between HC and HE regarding clinical and psychological measures, (p>0.05). At post- intervention, HC group had significantly lower HbA1C and PAL (reduction: 7%, 56%) than the HE group (reduction: HbA1C 0%; PAL 26%), (p≤0.01). Similarly HC group compared to HE group had better TBSES (increase: 61% vs.25%) and stress (reduction: 16% vs. 1%), (p≤0.01). Among high risk group patients (defined as for HbA1C≥8%; TBSE and PAID, responses at 33% percentile of the total sum score and those who felt stressed “always and/or mostly”), HC patients had significant improvements compared to those at HE group (reduction: HbA1C 16% vs. 5%; PAL 63% vs. 18%; stress 39% vs. 2%; fold increase: TBSES 6.6 vs. 3.6), (p≤0.01).
Conclusions: The present findings may imply that HC has a significantly higher impact on better management of oral health and glycemic control compared to HE. It is noteworthy that the impact was more significant among high risk group patients, thus HC may be recommended especially for high risk group T2DM patients.