Factors contributing to attrition behavior in diabetes self-management programs: A mixed method approach

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Diabetes self-management education is a critical component in diabetes care. Despite worldwide efforts to develop efficacious DSME programs, high attrition rates are often reported in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to examine factors that may contribute to attrition behavior in diabetes self-management programs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted telephone interviews with individuals who had Type 2 diabetes (n = 267) and attended a diabetes education centre. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with attrition behavior. Forty-four percent of participants (n = 118) withdrew prematurely from the program and were asked an open-ended question regarding their discontinuation of services. We used content analysis to code and generate themes, which were then organized under the Behavioral Model of Health Service Utilization.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Working full and part-time, being over 65 years of age, having a regular primary care physician or fewer diabetes symptoms were contributing factors to attrition behaviour in our multivariable logistic regression. The most common reasons given by participants for attrition from the program were conflict between their work schedules and the centre's hours of operation, patients' confidence in their own knowledge and ability when managing their diabetes, apathy towards diabetes education, distance to the centre, forgetfulness, regular physician consultation, low perceived seriousness of diabetes, and lack of familiarity with the centre and its services. There was considerable overlap between our quantitative and qualitative results.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Reducing attrition behaviour requires a range of strategies targeted towards delivering convenient and accessible services, familiarizing individuals with these services, increasing communication between centres and their patients, and creating better partnerships between centres and primary care physicians.</p

Structure oil-absorption relationships during deep-fat frying

Analysis of the oil-absorption process in deep-fat fried potato cylinders (frying temperatures of 155degreesC, 170degreesC, and 185degreesC) allowed to distinguish 3 oil fractions: structural oil (absorbed during frying), penetrated surface oil (suctioned during cooling), and surface oil. Results showed that a small amount of oil penetrates during frying because most of the oil was picked up at the end of the process, suggesting that oil uptake and water removal are not synchronous phenomena. After cooling, oil was located either on the surface of the chip or suctioned into the porous crust microstructure, with an inverse relationship between them for increasing frying times

BRIEF REPORT: Screening Items to Identify Patients with Limited Health Literacy Skills

BACKGROUND: Patients with limited literacy skills are routinely encountered in clinical practice, but they are not always identified by clinicians. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 3 candidate questions to determine their accuracy in identifying patients with limited or marginal health literacy skills. METHODS: We studied 305 English-speaking adults attending a university-based primary care clinic. Demographic items, health literacy screening questions, and the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) were administered to patients. To determine the accuracy of the candidate questions for identifying limited or marginal health literacy skills, we plotted area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves for each item, using REALM scores as a reference standard. RESULTS: The mean age of subjects was 49.5; 67.5% were female, 85.2% Caucasian, and 81.3% insured by TennCare and/or Medicare. Fifty-four (17.7%) had limited and 52 (17.0%) had marginal health literacy skills. One screening question, “How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself?” was accurate in detecting limited (AUROC of 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.77 to 0.86) and limited/marginal (AUROC of 0.79; 95% CI=0.74 to 0.83) health literacy skills. This question had significantly greater AUROC than either of the other questions (P<.01) and also a greater AUROC than questions based on demographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: One screening question may be sufficient for detecting limited and marginal health literacy skills in clinic populations