PURPOSE: Several health organizations, including the Canadian Diabetes Association, advocate use of the glycemic index (GI) in the nutritional management of diabetes. However, the clinical utility and applications of the GI remain controversial. Our goal was to determine, via a postal survey, whether dietitians were using the GI and barriers to its use if they were not. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2003. Members of Dietitians of Canada and the Ordre professionnel des diététistes du Québec (n=6,060) were first contacted by mail to identify those working with individuals with diabetes. Among respondents (n=2,857), 1,805 worked with individuals with diabetes and were sent a questionnaire. Using Chi-square analyses, users and nonusers were compared for their professional characteristics, perceived benefits, barriers, general knowledge about the concept, and confidence in teaching the GI. RESULTS: Among questionnaire respondents (n=1,057), 39% (n=415) used the GI and 61% (n=642) did not. Overall, users were more likely to have a greater diabetes patient caseload, perceived greater benefits and had greater confidence in teaching the concept. Nonusers cited lack of teaching tools and lack of knowledge on how to teach the concept as major barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is required to identify the clinical reasoning that triggers dietitians to apply the concept in their practice.
PURPOSE: Several health organizations, including the Canadian Diabetes Association, advocate use of the glycemic index (GI) in the nutritional management of diabetes. However, the clinical utility and applications of the GI remain controversial. Our goal was to determine, via a postal survey, whether dietitians were using the GI and barriers to its use if they were not. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2003. Members of Dietitians of Canada and the Ordre professionnel des diététistes du Québec (n=6,060) were first contacted by mail to identify those working with individuals with diabetes. Among respondents (n=2,857), 1,805 worked with individuals with diabetes and were sent a questionnaire. Using Chi-square analyses, users and nonusers were compared for their professional characteristics, perceived benefits, barriers, general knowledge about the concept, and confidence in teaching the GI. RESULTS: Among questionnaire respondents (n=1,057), 39% (n=415) used the GI and 61% (n=642) did not. Overall, users were more likely to have a greater diabetespatient caseload, perceived greater benefits and had greater confidence in teaching the concept. Nonusers cited lack of teaching tools and lack of knowledge on how to teach the concept as major barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is required to identify the clinical reasoning that triggers dietitians to apply the concept in their practice.
Authors: Shannan M Grant; Andrea J Glenn; Thomas M S Wolever; Robert G Josse; Deborah L O'Connor; Alexandra Thompson; Rebecca D Noseworthy; Maxine Seider; Melissa Sobie; Gurita Bhatti; Julianne Cavanagh; Emily Jones; Pauline B Darling Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 5.717