Association between person and disease related factors and the planned diabetes care in people who receive person-centered type 2 diabetes care : An implementation study

AIMS: To assess the planned diabetes care for the coming year and its associated factors in patients with Type 2 diabetes who have a person-centered annual consultation. METHODS: Implementation study of a new consultation model in 47 general practices (primary care) and 6 outpatient clinics (secondary care); 1200 patients from primary and 166 from secondary care participated. Data collection took place between November 2015 and February 2017. Outcomes: preferred monitoring frequency; referral to other health care provider(s); medication change. One measurement at the end of the consultation. We performed logistic regression analyses. Differences between primary and secondary care were analyzed. RESULTS: Many patients arranged a monitoring frequency <4 times per year (general practices 19.5%, outpatient clinics 40%, p < .001). Type of provider (physician/nurse, OR 3.83, p < .001), baseline HbA1c (OR 1.02, p = .017), glucose lowering medication; and setting treatment goals (OR .65, p = .048) were associated with the chosen frequency. Independently associated with a referral were age (OR .99, p = .039), baseline glucose lowering medication and patients' goal setting (OR 1.52, p = .016). Medication change was associated with type of provider, baseline HbA1c, blood glucose lowering medication, quality of life (OR .80, p = .037) and setting treatment goals (OR 2.64, p = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Not only disease but also person related factors, especially setting treatment goals, are independently associated with planned care use in person-centered diabetes care

Implementation of a Structured Diabetes Consultation Model to Facilitate a Person-Centered Approach: Results From a Nationwide Dutch Study

OBJECTIVE: We assessed both from a patient and provider perspective the usefulness and added value of a consultation model that facilitates person-centered diabetes care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The model consists of 1) inventory of disease and patient-related factors; 2) setting personal goals; 3) choosing treatment; and 4) determination of required care. It was implemented in 47 general practices and 6 hospital outpatient clinics. Providers were trained, and patients were recommended to prepare their visit. All filled out a questionnaire after every consultation. Differences between primary and secondary care practices and between physician-led and nurse-led consultations were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-four physicians and thirty-one nurses participated, reporting on 1,366 consultations with type 2 diabetes patients. According to providers, the model was applicable in 72.4% (nurses 79.3% vs. physicians 68.5%, P < 0.001). Physicians more often had a consultation time <25 min (80.4% vs. 56.9%, P < 0.001). According to providers, two of three patients spoke more than half of the consultation time (outpatient clinics 75.2% vs. general practices 66.6%, P = 0.002; nurses 73.2% vs. physicians 64.4%, P = 0.001). Providers stated that person-related factors often determined treatment goals. Almost all patients (94.4%) reported that they made shared decisions; they felt more involved than before (with physicians 45.1% vs. with nurses 33.6%, P < 0.001) and rated the consultation 8.6 of 10. After physician-led consultations, 52.5% reported that the consultation was better than before (nurse visit 33.7%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A consultation model to facilitate person-centered care seems well applicable and results in more patient involvement, including shared decision making, and is appreciated by a substantial number of patients

Patient activation in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: associated factors and the role of insulin

Aim: This study explored the relationship between insulin use and patient activation (a person's internal readiness and capabilities to undertake health-promoting actions) in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus and aimed to identify demographic, clinical and psychosocial factors involved in patient activation. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, baseline data from a Dutch nationwide study were analyzed. Patient activation was assessed with the Patient Activation Measure 13. A linear mixed model was used to take clustering into account. Results: In total, 1,189 persons were included (310 of whom were on insulin), enrolled via 47 general practices and six hospitals. Their mean Patient Activation Measure 13 score was 59±12. We found no association between insulin therapy and patient activation. In the multivariable analysis, individuals with a better health status, very good or very poor social support (vs good social support), individuals who felt they had greater control over their illness and those with a better subjective understanding of their illness showed higher patient activation. Individuals with a lower educational level and those who expected their illness to continue showed a lower activation level. Conclusion: Patient activation does not differ between individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus on insulin therapy and those on other therapies

Patient activation in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus : Associated factors and the role of insulin

Aim: This study explored the relationship between insulin use and patient activation (a person’s internal readiness and capabilities to undertake health-promoting actions) in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus and aimed to identify demographic, clinical and psychosocial factors involved in patient activation. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, baseline data from a Dutch nationwide study were analyzed. Patient activation was assessed with the Patient Activation Measure 13. A linear mixed model was used to take clustering into account. Results: In total, 1,189 persons were included (310 of whom were on insulin), enrolled via 47 general practices and six hospitals. Their mean Patient Activation Measure 13 score was 59±12. We found no association between insulin therapy and patient activation. In the multivariable analysis, individuals with a better health status, very good or very poor social support (vs good social support), individuals who felt they had greater control over their illness and those with a better subjective understanding of their illness showed higher patient activation. Individuals with a lower educational level and those who expected their illness to continue showed a lower activation level. Conclusion: Patient activation does not differ between individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus on insulin therapy and those on other therapies

Van jaarcontrole naar jaargesprek : Zorg op maat voor mensen met diabetes

Diabetes care is shifting from disease management to personalised care. Internationally, diabetes care providers are advised to integrate the patient's preferences, wishes and possibilities into diabetes care in order to improve its efficiency. The Dutch Diabetes Federation has developed a specifically patient-centred conversation model that can be systematically applied. At an annual appraisal, the physician and the patient make decisions on the treatment goals to set, and on the treatment and professional support needed to achieve these goals. In this way person-centred and efficient care may become reality. The first results of a pilot study are promising. Currently the applicability and added value of the model are being tested on a large scale. The model is more broadly applicable, which means this could be a new perspective for everyone with a chronic disease

Disease insight and treatment perception of men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE To investigate the levels of knowledge of prostate cancer and the perception of active surveillance (AS) in men on AS, as AS for early prostate cancer instead of radical treatment might partly solve the over-treatment dilemma in this disease, but might be experienced as a complex and contradictory strategy by patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 150 Dutch men recently diagnosed with early prostate cancer participating in a prospective protocol-based AS programme (PRIAS study) received questionnaires, including a 15-item measure on their general knowledge of prostate cancer, and open-ended questions on the most important disadvantages and advantages of AS, and on the specific perception of AS. We assessed knowledge scores and explored potentially associated factors, the stated (dis)advantages and specific perceptions. RESULTS The questionnaire response rate was 86% (129/150). Participants provided correct answers to a median (interquartile range) of 13 (12-14) of 15 (87%) knowledge items. Younger and higher educated men had higher knowledge scores. In line with a priori hypotheses, the most frequently reported advantage and disadvantage of AS were the delay of side-effects and the risk of disease progression, respectively. Specific negative experiences included the feeling of losing control over treatment decisions, distress at follow-up visits, and the desire for a more active participation in disease management. No conceptually wrong understandings or expectations of AS were identified. CONCLUSIONS We found adequate knowledge of prostate cancer levels and realistic perceptions of the AS strategy in patients with early prostate cancer and on AS. These findings suggest adequate counselling by the physician or patient self-educatio

Informed decision making on PSA testing for the detection of prostate cancer: An evaluation of a leaflet with risk indicator

Background: Population-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. To help men making informed decisions about prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening a risk indicator (www.uroweb.org) was developed. This risk indicator is embedded in a leaflet that informs men about the pros and cons of PCa screening and enables calculation of the individual risk of having a biopsy detectable PCa. Aim: To assess the effect of providing a leaflet including individualized risk estimation on informed decision making of men, i.e. knowledge about PCa and PSA screening, attitude towards undergoing a PSA test and intention to have a PSA test. Methods: An intervention study among 2000 men, aged 55-65 years, randomly selected from the population registry of the city of Dordrecht, the Netherlands, in 2008. Men were sent a questionnaire on knowledge of PCa, attitude and intention to have a PSA test. Men without a history of (screening for) PCa were sent the leaflet and Questionnaire 2 within 2 weeks after returning Questionnaire 1. Validated health and anxiety measures were used. Results: One thousand and twenty seven of 2000 men completed Questionnaire 1 (51%), of whom 298 were excluded due to a history of (screening for) PCa. Of the 729 remaining men, 601 completed Questionnaire 2 as well. At the second assessment significantly more men met the requirements of informed decision making (15% versus 33%, p <0.001), more men had relevant knowledge (284/601, 50% versus 420/601, 77%, p <0.001) and the intention to have a PSA test had increased (p <0.001). Conclusions: Providing information on PCa screening combined with individualized risk estimation enhanced informed decision making and may be used for shared decision making on PSA screening of physicians and patients. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserve

Compliance with biopsy recommendations of a prostate cancer risk calculator

OBJECTIVES To assess both urologist and patient compliance with a 'no biopsy' or 'biopsy' recommendation of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Risk Calculator (RC), as well as their reasons for non-compliance. To assess determinants of patient compliance. PATIENTS AND METHODS The ERSPC RC calculates the probability on a positive sextant prostate biopsy (Pposb) using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, outcomes of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography, and ultrasonographically assessed prostate volume. A biopsy was recommended if P posb >= 20%. Between 2008 and 2011, eight urologists from five Dutch hospitals included 443 patients (aged 55-75 years) after a PSA test with no previous biopsy. Urologists calculated the P posb using the RC in the presence of patients and completed a questionnaire about compliance. Patients completed a questionnaire about prostate cancer knowledge, attitude towards prostate biopsy, self-rated health (12-Item Short Form Health Survey), anxiety (State Trait Anxiety Inventory-6, Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer) and decision-making measures (Decisional Conflict Scale). RESULTS Both urologists and patients complied with the RC recommendation in 368 of 443 (83%) cases. If a biopsy was recommended, almost all patients (96%; 257/269) complied, although 63 of the 174 (36%) patients were biopsied against the recommendation of the RC. Compliers with a 'no biopsy' recommendation had a lower mean P posb than non-compliers (9% vs 14%; P <0.001). Urologists opted for biopsies against the recommendations of the RC because of an elevated PSA level (>= 3 ng/mL) (78%; 49/63) and patients because they wanted certainty (60%; 38/63). CONCLUSIONS Recommendations of the ERSPC RC on prostate biopsy were followed in most patients. The RC hence may be a promising tool for supporting clinical decision-making