中文摘要：

目的比较两种膳食健康教育方式在社区2型糖尿病管理中的应用效果，评价“食物快速估算手测量法”在社区糖尿病管理中的作用。方法2015年6月～2016年6月采用立意抽样的方法，在舟山市定海区城区选择工作基础相似的2个卫生服务站，随机分成实验组（有效调查50人）和对照组（有效调查46人）。实验组应用“食物快速估算手测量法”进行膳食教育，对照组应用常规的方法进行膳食教育。采用问卷调查、体格检查和生化检查获得有关观察指标。结果干预后，相关知识总知晓率实验组和对照组有提高，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05），且实验组比对照组提高得更多，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。干预后对“自我执行糖尿病膳食治疗满意度”的满意率，2组均较干预前有所降低，但只有实验组差异有统计学意义。干预前，2组间的各项观察指标差异绝大多数无统计学意义。干预后各项监测指标中，实验组的BP、HDL—C达标率有所上升，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。对照组的LDL—C达标率有所上升，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。干预后各项监测指标的平均值，实验组的LDL—C、HDL—C指标值有所改善，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。对照组的腰围、HbA1c、LDL—C、HDL—C指标值有所改善，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。但干预后2组间的监测指标达标率和平均值差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论“糖尿病食物快速估算手测量法”相比传统的膳食教育方法，提高相关知识的作用更加明显，但仅以常规的形式进行膳食教育，不会取得比传统的教育方式更好的效果，需进一步探索糖尿病患者膳食教育形式。

英文摘要：

Objective To compare the effectiveness of two dietary health education methods in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in community, and to evaluate the role of ＂food fast estimation hand measurement＂ in commmlity diabetes management. Methods Using purposive sampling method, we chose 2 health service stations operated on the same basis, and randomly divided into experimental group and control group. In the experimental group, we use food quick hand measurement to conduct the dietary education,and in the control group we use the conventional method to conduct the dietary education. We effectively investigated 96 cases of diabetes, he observation indexes were obtained by questionnaire, physical examination and biochemical examination. Results In the experimental group and the control group, the difference was statistically significant（ P 〈 0.05） ,and the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant（ P 〈 0.01 ）. The satisfaction rate of the ＂self executing diabetes diet treat- ment satisfaction＂ after the intervention were lower than that before the intervention, but only the experimental group had statistical significance. Before the intervention, the observed differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. In each monitoring index,the BP and HDL-C compliance rate of the experimental group was increased, and the difference was statistically significant（P 〈0.05）. Control group LDL-C compliance rate has increased,and the difference was statistically significant（ P 〈0.01 ）. The average value of each monitoring index,the LDL-C and HDL-C indexes of the experimental group were improved, and the difference was statistically significant （ P 〈 0.01 ）. The waist circumference, HbA1 e, LDL-C, HDL-C indexes of the control group were improved, and the difference was statistically significant （P 〈 0.01 ）. But there was no significant difference between the two groups after the intervent