Richard W Grant1,2, Lina Pabon-Nau1,2, Kaile M Ross3, Emily J Youatt3, Jennifer C Pandiscio1,3, Elyse R Park3,2. 1. The Division of General Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Grant, Dr Pabon-Nau, Ms Pandiscio) 2. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Grant, Dr Pabon-Nau, Dr Park) 3. The Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Boston, Massachusetts (Ms Ross, Ms Youatt, Ms Pandiscio, Dr Park),
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare patient perceptions about medication management with principles underlying American Diabetes Association (ADA) published treatment algorithms. METHODS: Six focus groups (4 English and 2 Spanish) were conducted with 50 patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients were asked about their prior experiences with initiating and changing oral medicines. They were also shown a medication plan for a hypothetical patient depicting future potential changes to achieve glycemic control. Coded responses were mapped to 3 concepts implicit in the ADA recommended treatment algorithm: (1) prescribing medicines to achieve A1c goal is beneficial, (2) medical regimens are generally intensified, and (3) intensification should be timely. RESULTS: Patient perceptions contrasted markedly with the treatment algorithm: (1) most patients had negative perceptions of medication initiation, viewing this event as evidence of personal failure and an increased burden; (2) patients equated medication intensification with increased risk for diabetes-related complications (rather than a step to reduce future risk) and viewed de-escalation as a primary goal; and (3) no patients expressed concerns about delays in medication intensification. Patients responded very favorably to an individualized medication plan depicting future potential changes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in this study described a conceptual model for medication therapy that contrasted in critical ways from the principles of current treatment guidelines. Underscoring the key role of patient-provider communication, the results suggest that effective counseling should also include an informed discussion of future medication intensification.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare patient perceptions about medication management with principles underlying American Diabetes Association (ADA) published treatment algorithms. METHODS: Six focus groups (4 English and 2 Spanish) were conducted with 50 patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients were asked about their prior experiences with initiating and changing oral medicines. They were also shown a medication plan for a hypothetical patient depicting future potential changes to achieve glycemic control. Coded responses were mapped to 3 concepts implicit in the ADA recommended treatment algorithm: (1) prescribing medicines to achieve A1c goal is beneficial, (2) medical regimens are generally intensified, and (3) intensification should be timely. RESULTS:Patient perceptions contrasted markedly with the treatment algorithm: (1) most patients had negative perceptions of medication initiation, viewing this event as evidence of personal failure and an increased burden; (2) patients equated medication intensification with increased risk for diabetes-related complications (rather than a step to reduce future risk) and viewed de-escalation as a primary goal; and (3) no patients expressed concerns about delays in medication intensification. Patients responded very favorably to an individualized medication plan depicting future potential changes. CONCLUSIONS:Patients in this study described a conceptual model for medication therapy that contrasted in critical ways from the principles of current treatment guidelines. Underscoring the key role of patient-provider communication, the results suggest that effective counseling should also include an informed discussion of future medication intensification.
Authors: William H Polonsky; Lawrence Fisher; Susan Guzman; Leonel Villa-Caballero; Steven V Edelman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Richard Grant; Alyce S Adams; Connie Mah Trinacty; Fang Zhang; Ken Kleinman; Stephen B Soumerai; James B Meigs; Dennis Ross-Degnan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-01-26 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: David M Nathan; John B Buse; Mayer B Davidson; Robert J Heine; Rury R Holman; Robert Sherwin; Bernard Zinman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: John Hsu; Mary Price; Jie Huang; Richard Brand; Vicki Fung; Rita Hui; Bruce Fireman; Joseph P Newhouse; Joseph V Selby Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Risa P Hayes; Lee Bowman; Patrick O Monahan; David G Marrero; Colleen A McHorney Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2006 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Mark Peyrot; Richard R Rubin; Torsten Lauritzen; Soren E Skovlund; Frank J Snoek; David R Matthews; Rüdiger Landgraf; Line Kleinebreil Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Edward W Gregg; Betsy L Cadwell; Yiling J Cheng; Catherine C Cowie; Desmond E Williams; Linda Geiss; Michael M Engelgau; Frank Vinicor Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Rozalina G McCoy; Kasia J Lipska; Xiaoxi Yao; Joseph S Ross; Victor M Montori; Nilay D Shah Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Paige C Fairchild; Aviva G Nathan; Michael Quinn; Elbert S Huang; Neda Laiteerapong Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Neda Ratanawongsa; Andrew J Karter; Melissa M Parker; Courtney R Lyles; Michele Heisler; Howard H Moffet; Nancy Adler; E Margaret Warton; Dean Schillinger Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-02-11 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Neda Ratanawongsa; Jesse C Crosson; Dean Schillinger; Andrew J Karter; Chandan K Saha; David G Marrero Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2012-01-05 Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Charlene C Quinn; Patricia L Sareh; Michelle L Shardell; Michael L Terrin; Erik A Barr; Ann L Gruber-Baldini Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2014-02-05
Authors: Neda Ratanawongsa; Andrew J Karter; Judy Quan; Melissa M Parker; Margaret Handley; Urmimala Sarkar; Julie A Schmittdiel; Dean Schillinger Journal: J Manag Care Spec Pharm Date: 2015-08
Authors: Christine P Kowalski; Deanna B McQuillan; Neetu Chawla; Courtney Lyles; Andrea Altschuler; Connie S Uratsu; Elizabeth A Bayliss; Michele Heisler; Richard W Grant Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2018 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.657