Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 28:16:809-819.
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S354686. eCollection 2022.

Key Factors Relevant for Healthcare Decisions of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Secondary Care According to Healthcare Professionals

Merel M Ruissen  1   2   3 , Jacob K Sont  2 , Heidi A van Vugt  4   5 , Marleen Kunneman  2   3 , Guy E H M Rutten  4 , Eelco J P de Koning  1
Affiliations

Key Factors Relevant for Healthcare Decisions of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Secondary Care According to Healthcare Professionals

Merel M Ruissen et al. Patient Prefer Adherence. .

Abstract

Purpose: Understanding which factors are important for healthcare decisions of patients with diabetes in clinical practice is important to personalise diabetes care strategies and tailor care plans to the individual. The main drivers for these healthcare decisions remain unclear. This study assessed which key factors are relevant for healthcare decisions during clinical consultations for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM), according to healthcare professionals.

Materials and methods: Annual diabetes reviews were performed as part of a trial assessing the impact of a consultation model facilitating person-centred diabetes care in six hospital outpatient clinics. After each consultation, we asked healthcare professionals to choose a maximum of three out of 20 factors that were most relevant for healthcare decisions about treatment goals and the professional support needed during the upcoming year. Factors were characterised as either person or disease-related. Percentages reflect the number of annual diabetes reviews in which the key factor was reported.

Results: Seventeen physicians and eight diabetes specialist nurses reported the key factors relevant for healthcare decisions in 285 annual diabetes reviews (T1DM n = 119, T2DM n = 166). Healthcare professionals most often reported quality of life (31.9%), motivation (27.0%) and diabetes self-management (25.6%), and to a lesser extent glycaemic control (24.2%), to be important for decisions about treatment goals. For decisions about the professional support needed during the upcoming year patient's preferences (33.7%), diabetes self-management (33.3%), quality of life (27.0%) and motivation (25.6%) were most often considered relevant by healthcare professionals.

Conclusion: According to healthcare professionals, person-related factors such as quality of life, diabetes self-management and motivation are predominantly relevant for healthcare decisions about treatment goals and the professional support needed during the upcoming year.

Keywords: diabetes mellitus; person-centred; preferences; shared decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no potential competing interests relevant to this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Person and disease-related factors relevant for healthcare decisions for patients T1DM and T2DM, according to healthcare professionals. After the consultation healthcare professionals indicated the most important factors (max. three factors) determining decisions about treatment goals and the professional support needed during the upcoming year. Bars represent the percentage of annual diabetes reviews in which each factor was reported by healthcare professionals for decisions about treatment goals (black bars) and the professional support needed (white bars).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gonzalez JS, Peyrot M, McCarl LA, et al. Depression and diabetes treatment nonadherence: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(12):2398–2403. doi:10.2337/dc08-1341 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beverly EA, Brooks KM, Ritholz MD, Abrahamson MJ, Weinger K. Assessment of emotional struggles in type 2 diabetes: patient perspectives. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(8):e62. doi:10.2337/dc12-0661 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Young-Hyman D, de Groot M, Hill-Briggs F, Gonzalez JS, Hood K, Peyrot M. Psychosocial care for people with diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(12):2126–2140. doi:10.2337/dc16-2053 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wermeling PR, Gorter KJ, van Stel HF, Rutten GE. Both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbidity are related to health status in well-controlled type 2 diabetes patients: a cross-sectional analysis. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2012;11(1):121. doi:10.1186/1475-2840-11-121 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Federation ID. IDF Diabetes Atlas 10th edition 2021. International Diabetes Federation. February 4, 2022. www.diabetesatlas.org. Accessed February 4, 2022.