Strategies for improving participation in diabetes education. A qualitative study

Standard

Strategies for improving participation in diabetes education. A qualitative study. / Schäfer, Ingmar; Pawels, Marc; Küver, Claudia; Pohontsch, Nadine Janis; Scherer, Martin; van den Bussche, Hendrik; Kaduszkiewicz, Hanna.

In: PLOS ONE, Vol. 9, No. 4, 01.01.2014, p. e95035.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{4d670d7911f348bea3e17b1a6cdea9fa,
title = "Strategies for improving participation in diabetes education. A qualitative study",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent and can lead to serious complications and mortality. Patient education can help to avoid negative outcomes, but up to half of the patients do not participate. The aim of this study was to analyze patients' attitudes towards diabetes education in order to identify barriers to participation and develop strategies for better patient education.METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study. Seven GP practices were purposively selected based on socio-demographic data of city districts in Hamburg, Germany. Study participants were selected by their GPs in order to increase participation. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14 patients. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The sample size was determined by data saturation. Data were analysed by qualitative content analysis. Categories were determined deductively and inductively.RESULTS: The interviews yielded four types of barriers: 1) Statements and behaviour of the attending physician influence the patients' decisions about diabetes education. 2) Both, a good state of health related to diabetes and physical/psychosocial comorbidity can be reasons for non-participation. 3) Manifold motivational factors were discussed. They ranged from giving low priority to diabetes to avoidance of implications of diabetes education as being confronted with illness narratives of others. 4) Barriers also include aspects of the patients' knowledge and activity.CONCLUSIONS: First, physicians should encourage patients to participate in diabetes education and argue that they can profit even if actual treatment and examination results are promising. Second, patients with other priorities, psychic comorbidity or functional limitations might profit more from continuous individualized education adapted to their specific situation instead of group education. Third, it might be justified that patients do not participate in diabetes education if they have slightly increased blood sugar values only and no risk for harmful consequences or if they already have sufficient knowledge on diabetes.",
author = "Ingmar Sch{\"a}fer and Marc Pawels and Claudia K{\"u}ver and Pohontsch, {Nadine Janis} and Martin Scherer and {van den Bussche}, Hendrik and Hanna Kaduszkiewicz",
year = "2014",
month = jan,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0095035",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "e95035",
journal = "PLOS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Strategies for improving participation in diabetes education. A qualitative study

AU - Schäfer, Ingmar

AU - Pawels, Marc

AU - Küver, Claudia

AU - Pohontsch, Nadine Janis

AU - Scherer, Martin

AU - van den Bussche, Hendrik

AU - Kaduszkiewicz, Hanna

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent and can lead to serious complications and mortality. Patient education can help to avoid negative outcomes, but up to half of the patients do not participate. The aim of this study was to analyze patients' attitudes towards diabetes education in order to identify barriers to participation and develop strategies for better patient education.METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study. Seven GP practices were purposively selected based on socio-demographic data of city districts in Hamburg, Germany. Study participants were selected by their GPs in order to increase participation. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14 patients. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The sample size was determined by data saturation. Data were analysed by qualitative content analysis. Categories were determined deductively and inductively.RESULTS: The interviews yielded four types of barriers: 1) Statements and behaviour of the attending physician influence the patients' decisions about diabetes education. 2) Both, a good state of health related to diabetes and physical/psychosocial comorbidity can be reasons for non-participation. 3) Manifold motivational factors were discussed. They ranged from giving low priority to diabetes to avoidance of implications of diabetes education as being confronted with illness narratives of others. 4) Barriers also include aspects of the patients' knowledge and activity.CONCLUSIONS: First, physicians should encourage patients to participate in diabetes education and argue that they can profit even if actual treatment and examination results are promising. Second, patients with other priorities, psychic comorbidity or functional limitations might profit more from continuous individualized education adapted to their specific situation instead of group education. Third, it might be justified that patients do not participate in diabetes education if they have slightly increased blood sugar values only and no risk for harmful consequences or if they already have sufficient knowledge on diabetes.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent and can lead to serious complications and mortality. Patient education can help to avoid negative outcomes, but up to half of the patients do not participate. The aim of this study was to analyze patients' attitudes towards diabetes education in order to identify barriers to participation and develop strategies for better patient education.METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study. Seven GP practices were purposively selected based on socio-demographic data of city districts in Hamburg, Germany. Study participants were selected by their GPs in order to increase participation. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14 patients. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The sample size was determined by data saturation. Data were analysed by qualitative content analysis. Categories were determined deductively and inductively.RESULTS: The interviews yielded four types of barriers: 1) Statements and behaviour of the attending physician influence the patients' decisions about diabetes education. 2) Both, a good state of health related to diabetes and physical/psychosocial comorbidity can be reasons for non-participation. 3) Manifold motivational factors were discussed. They ranged from giving low priority to diabetes to avoidance of implications of diabetes education as being confronted with illness narratives of others. 4) Barriers also include aspects of the patients' knowledge and activity.CONCLUSIONS: First, physicians should encourage patients to participate in diabetes education and argue that they can profit even if actual treatment and examination results are promising. Second, patients with other priorities, psychic comorbidity or functional limitations might profit more from continuous individualized education adapted to their specific situation instead of group education. Third, it might be justified that patients do not participate in diabetes education if they have slightly increased blood sugar values only and no risk for harmful consequences or if they already have sufficient knowledge on diabetes.

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0095035

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0095035

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 24733428

VL - 9

SP - e95035

JO - PLOS ONE

JF - PLOS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

ER -