Introduction: Diabetes mellitus as a group of metabolic disorders is the most common disease in the world, which is on a rapidly growing trend. This disease causes dangerous complications, including cardiovascular problems, nephropathy, hypertension, ocular complications, and psychiatric disorders, each of which can singly affect the individuals’ quality of life. Regarding this, it seems essential to implement some interventions based on educational models and patterns to improve the quality of life in these patients. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of two educational interventions, namely health promotion model and health belief model, on the quality of life among patients with type II diabetes mellitus.

Materials and Method: This clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients with type II diabetes mellitus. The study population was selected through purposive sampling technique, and then randomly divided into two groups receiving two different educational interventions, namely Pender’ health promotion model (n=30) and health belief model (n=30). After filling out the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) by the participants, they were subjected to the educational interventions for four weeks. After the intervention, SF-36 was completed again. The data were analyzed using SPSS software, version 22.

Results: Based on the results, the mean quality of life score in the Pender’s health promotion model group was 52.12±10.19 prior to the intervention. However, this score increased to 68.21±9.91 after the intervention. The statistical comparison of the mean quality of life scores before and after the intervention showed a significant difference in this group (P=0.001). Furthermore, regarding the health belief model group, the mean quality of life was 50.01±12.22 before the intervention, which increased to 69.94±12.86 following the intervention. Likewise, there was a significant difference in the mean quality of life in this group before and after the intervention (P=0.001). The two groups showed no statistically significant difference in terms of the mean quality of life before the intervention (P=0.09). Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in this regard after the intervention (P=0.11).

Conclusion: According to the findings, the educational models and patterns can be effective in the improvement of the quality of life in diabetic patients. Nonetheless, the two models showed no superiority over each other.