Neda Ratanawongsa1, Jesse C Crosson2, Dean Schillinger1,3, Andrew J Karter4, Chandan K Saha5, David G Marrero6. 1. The General Internal Medicine and UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations at San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, California (Dr Ratanawongsa, Dr Schillinger) 2. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey (Dr Crosson) 3. California Diabetes Program, California Department of Public Health, San Francisco, California (Dr Schillinger) 4. Epidemiology and Health Services Research, Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California (Dr Karter) 5. Division of Biostatistics, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana (Dr Saha) 6. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana (Dr Marrero)
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this cross-sectional study is to explore primary care providers' (PCPs) perceptions about barriers to initiating insulin among patients. Studies suggest that many patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes do not receive insulin initiation by PCPs. METHODS: As part of the Translating Research Into Action for Diabetes study, the authors conducted structured interviews in health systems in Indiana, New Jersey, and California, asking PCPs about the importance of insulin initiation and factors affecting this decision. The authors calculated proportions choosing each multiple-choice response option and listed the most frequently offered open-ended response categories. RESULTS: Among 83 PCPs, 45% were women; 60% were white; and they averaged 13.4 years in practice. Four-fifths of PCPs endorsed guideline-concordant glycemic targets, but 54% individualized targets based on patient age, life expectancy, medical comorbidities, self-management capacity, and willingness. Most (64%) reported that many patients were resistant to new oral or insulin therapies due to fears about the therapy and what it meant about their disease progression. Two-thirds (64%) cited patient resistance as a barrier to insulin initiation, and 43% cited problems with patient self-management, including cognitive or mental health issues, dexterity, or ability to adhere. Eighty percent felt that patient nonadherence would dissuade them from initiating insulin at least some of the time. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs perceived that patient resistance and poor self- management skills were significant barriers to initiating insulin. Future studies should investigate whether systems-level interventions to improve patient-provider communication about insulin and enhance providers' perceptions of patient self-management capacity can increase guideline-concordant, patient-centered insulin initiation.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this cross-sectional study is to explore primary care providers' (PCPs) perceptions about barriers to initiating insulin among patients. Studies suggest that many patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes do not receive insulin initiation by PCPs. METHODS: As part of the Translating Research Into Action for Diabetes study, the authors conducted structured interviews in health systems in Indiana, New Jersey, and California, asking PCPs about the importance of insulin initiation and factors affecting this decision. The authors calculated proportions choosing each multiple-choice response option and listed the most frequently offered open-ended response categories. RESULTS: Among 83 PCPs, 45% were women; 60% were white; and they averaged 13.4 years in practice. Four-fifths of PCPs endorsed guideline-concordant glycemic targets, but 54% individualized targets based on patient age, life expectancy, medical comorbidities, self-management capacity, and willingness. Most (64%) reported that many patients were resistant to new oral or insulin therapies due to fears about the therapy and what it meant about their disease progression. Two-thirds (64%) cited patient resistance as a barrier to insulin initiation, and 43% cited problems with patient self-management, including cognitive or mental health issues, dexterity, or ability to adhere. Eighty percent felt that patient nonadherence would dissuade them from initiating insulin at least some of the time. CONCLUSIONS:PCPs perceived that patient resistance and poor self- management skills were significant barriers to initiating insulin. Future studies should investigate whether systems-level interventions to improve patient-provider communication about insulin and enhance providers' perceptions of patient self-management capacity can increase guideline-concordant, patient-centered insulin initiation.
Authors: L S Phillips; W T Branch; C B Cook; J P Doyle; I M El-Kebbi; D L Gallina; C D Miller; D C Ziemer; C S Barnes Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-11-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Richard W Grant; Deborah J Wexler; Alice J Watson; William T Lester; Enrico Cagliero; Eric G Campbell; David M Nathan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-03-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Nicolas Rodondi; Tiffany Peng; Andrew J Karter; Douglas C Bauer; Eric Vittinghoff; Simon Tang; Daniel Pettitt; Eve A Kerr; Joe V Selby Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-04-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: David C Ziemer; Joyce P Doyle; Catherine S Barnes; William T Branch; Curtiss B Cook; Imad M El-Kebbi; Daniel L Gallina; Paul Kolm; Mary K Rhee; Lawrence S Phillips Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2006-03-13
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: Michelle M Jacob; Kelly L Gonzales; Darren Calhoun; Janette Beals; Clemma Jacobsen Muller; Jack Goldberg; Lonnie Nelson; Thomas K Welty; Barbara V Howard Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 2.852
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