4 research outputs found
Diabetes care: reasons for missing HbA1c measurements in general practice
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Glycated haemoglobin (HbA<sub>1c</sub>) is often used as one of the indicators to measure the quality of diabetes care. Complete registration is difficult to obtain. This study investigated the reasons for missing HbA<sub>1c </sub>measurements.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>HbA<sub>1c </sub>measurements for 1485 patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 who were attended by 19 general practitioners at 4 primary care health centres in south-east Amsterdam were studied. HbA<sub>1c </sub>measurements were missing for 356 (23.9%) of the patients. The main reason stated in 50% of the cases was that the patient was under specialized care.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The general practitioners provided multiple reasons for the missing HbA<sub>1c </sub>measurements. This study provides insight into why HbA<sub>1c </sub>measurements were not present in the patients' electronic medical record.</p
Diabeteszelfmanagementondersteuning van patiënten met lage gezondheidsvaardigheden. Opvattingen van patiënten en zorgverleners
Diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy: Perceptions of patients and providers
The aim of the present study was to explore perceptions and strategies of health care providers regarding diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy (LHL), and to compare their self-management support with the needs of patients with LHL and type 2 diabetes. This study serves as a problem analysis for systematic intervention development to improve diabetes self-management among patients with LHL. This qualitative study used in-depth interviews with general practitioners (n = 4), nurse practitioners (n = 5), and patients with LHL (n = 31). The results of the interviews with health care providers guided the patient interviews. In addition, we observed 10 general practice consultations. Providers described patients with LHL as uninvolved and less motivated patients who do not understand self-management. Their main strategy to improve self-management was to provide standard information on a repeated basis. Patients with LHL seemed to have a different view of diabetes self-management than their providers. Most demonstrated a low awareness of what self-management involves, but did not express needing more information. They reported several practical barriers to self-management, although they seemed reluctant to use the information provided to overcome them. Providing and repeating information does not fit the needs of patients with LHL regarding diabetes self-management support. Health care providers do not seem to have the insight or the tools to systematically support diabetes self-management in this group. Systematic intervention development with a focus on skills-based approaches rather than cognition development may improve diabetes self-management support of patients with LH