Primary care physician perspectives on barriers and facilitators to self‐management of type 2 diabetes. Issue 1 (22nd November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Khairnar, Rahul; Kamal, Khalid M.; Giannetti, Vincent; Dwibedi, Nilanjana; McConaha, Jamie
• Is Part Of: Journal of pharmaceutical health services research. Volume 10:Issue 1(2019:Mar.)
• Page Start: 117
• Page End: 123
• Publication Date: 2018-11-22
• Subjects: clinical inertia -- diabetes self‐care -- diabetes self‐management -- glycaemic stability -- physician challenges -- physician perceptions; Pharmacy -- Research -- Periodicals; Drugs -- Research -- Periodicals; Medical care -- Research -- Periodicals; Public health -- Research -- Periodicals; Pharmaceutical industry -- Periodicals; Health Services Research -- Periodicals; Economics, Pharmaceutical -- Periodicals; 615.1072
• DOI: 10.1111/jphs.12280
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1759-8885

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: To assess physician perspectives on perceived barriers and facilitators to type 2 diabetes self‐management (DSM) in a primary care setting. Methods: The study utilized survey methodology to measure perspectives of primary care physicians on DSM and the challenges they face in managing patients with poor glycaemic stability. Demographic and practice site‐related information of the physicians were also collected. Key findings: Of the 21 physicians who responded (53.8% response rate), 71.2% were aged 50 years or older, 54.2% had ≥25 years of clinical experience, and 50% practiced in an urban setting. The physicians examined 5–60 patients with type 2 diabetes per week (mean = 20), and over 75% of them spent <20 min on face‐to‐face visits. Approximately, 95% of physicians considered self‐care activities such as regular moderate exercise, following a recommended diet, regular blood glucose testing, proper insulin administration and adherence to oral medication as extremely important. Practice‐related aspects such as patient–physician communication, patient health literacy and patient follow‐up were unanimously considered extremely important, and performance on these measures was rated positively. Interestingly, 66% of physicians felt responsible to some extent for their patient's failure to reach type 2 DSM goals. Physician perceived barriers that contributed to clinical inertia included cost of medications, lack of patient motivation and knowledge, non‐compliance with diet and medications, polypharmacy and lack of time and social support. Conclusions: The study results underscore the importance of DSM in the overall management of type 2 diabetes. Addressing the challenges faced by physicians may result in better self‐management and improved clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes population.