AIMS: To assess the availability and types of psychological services for people with diabetes in the UK, compliance with national guidelines and skills of the diabetes team in, and attitudes towards, psychological aspects of diabetes management. METHODS: Postal questionnaires to team leads (doctor and nurse) of all UK diabetes centres (n = 464) followed by semi-structured telephone interviews of expert providers of psychological services identified by team leads. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-seven centres (58%) returned postal questionnaires; 66 (25%) identified a named expert provider of psychological services, of whom 53 (80%) were interviewed by telephone. Less than one-third (n = 84) of responding centres had access to specialist psychological services and availability varied across the four UK nations (P = 0.02). Over two-thirds (n = 182) of centres had not implemented the majority of national guidelines and only 2.6% met all guidelines. Psychological input into teams was associated with improved training in psychological issues for team members (P < 0.001), perception of better skills in managing more complex psychological issues (P < or = 0.01) and increased likelihood of having psychological care pathways (P < or = 0.05). Most (81%) expert providers interviewed by telephone were under-resourced to meet the psychological needs of their population. CONCLUSIONS: Expert psychological support is not available to the majority of diabetes centres and significant geographical variation indicates inequity of service provision. Only a minority of centres meet national guidelines. Skills and services within diabetes teams vary widely and are positively influenced by the presence of expert providers of psychological care. Lack of resources are a barrier to service provision.
AIMS: To assess the availability and types of psychological services for people with diabetes in the UK, compliance with national guidelines and skills of the diabetes team in, and attitudes towards, psychological aspects of diabetes management. METHODS: Postal questionnaires to team leads (doctor and nurse) of all UK diabetes centres (n = 464) followed by semi-structured telephone interviews of expert providers of psychological services identified by team leads. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-seven centres (58%) returned postal questionnaires; 66 (25%) identified a named expert provider of psychological services, of whom 53 (80%) were interviewed by telephone. Less than one-third (n = 84) of responding centres had access to specialist psychological services and availability varied across the four UK nations (P = 0.02). Over two-thirds (n = 182) of centres had not implemented the majority of national guidelines and only 2.6% met all guidelines. Psychological input into teams was associated with improved training in psychological issues for team members (P < 0.001), perception of better skills in managing more complex psychological issues (P < or = 0.01) and increased likelihood of having psychological care pathways (P < or = 0.05). Most (81%) expert providers interviewed by telephone were under-resourced to meet the psychological needs of their population. CONCLUSIONS: Expert psychological support is not available to the majority of diabetes centres and significant geographical variation indicates inequity of service provision. Only a minority of centres meet national guidelines. Skills and services within diabetes teams vary widely and are positively influenced by the presence of expert providers of psychological care. Lack of resources are a barrier to service provision.
Authors: Elina Tsiouli; Evangelos C Alexopoulos; Charikleia Stefanaki; Christina Darviri; George P Chrousos Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Suzanne Murray; Patrice Lazure; Sara Schroter; Philipp J Leuschner; Peter Posel; Thomas Kellner; Richard D Jenkins Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: F Pouwer; C J Tack; P H L M Geelhoed-Duijvestijn; E Bazelmans; A T Beekman; R J Heine; F J Snoek Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 10.122