AIMS: Use of blood glucose targets is considered essential to help patients with Type 1 diabetes achieve tight glycaemic control following structured education. To foster effective use of blood glucose targets, we explored patients' experiences and views of implementing clinically recommended blood glucose targets after attending a structured education programme promoting intensive insulin treatment. METHODS: Repeat, in-depth interviews with 30 patients with Type 1 diabetes recruited from Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) courses in the UK. Data were analysed using an inductive, thematic approach. RESULTS: Patients found use of blood glucose targets motivational. Targets enabled patients to identify problems with blood glucose control and prompted them to make insulin dose adjustments independently, or with assistance. However, patients tended to adapt or simplify targets over time to: make them more attainable and easy to remember; reduce risk of hypoglycaemia; and, mitigate feelings of failure when attempts to attain clinically defined targets were unsuccessful. Some patients were advised to use elevated targets to counter hypoglycaemia unawareness and required help from health professionals to determine when/if these should be reduced. CONCLUSIONS: Although blood glucose targets are an important component of diabetes self-management, patients may adapt and personalize them over time, sometimes inadvertently, with a potentially detrimental impact on long-term glycaemic control. Blood glucose targets should be regularly revisited during clinical reviews and revised/new targets agreed to accommodate patients' concerns and difficulties. Other interventions may need to be considered to promote effective use of blood glucose targets.
AIMS: Use of blood glucose targets is considered essential to help patients with Type 1 diabetes achieve tight glycaemic control following structured education. To foster effective use of blood glucose targets, we explored patients' experiences and views of implementing clinically recommended blood glucose targets after attending a structured education programme promoting intensive insulin treatment. METHODS: Repeat, in-depth interviews with 30 patients with Type 1 diabetes recruited from Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) courses in the UK. Data were analysed using an inductive, thematic approach. RESULTS: Patients found use of blood glucose targets motivational. Targets enabled patients to identify problems with blood glucose control and prompted them to make insulin dose adjustments independently, or with assistance. However, patients tended to adapt or simplify targets over time to: make them more attainable and easy to remember; reduce risk of hypoglycaemia; and, mitigate feelings of failure when attempts to attain clinically defined targets were unsuccessful. Some patients were advised to use elevated targets to counter hypoglycaemia unawareness and required help from health professionals to determine when/if these should be reduced. CONCLUSIONS: Although blood glucose targets are an important component of diabetes self-management, patients may adapt and personalize them over time, sometimes inadvertently, with a potentially detrimental impact on long-term glycaemic control. Blood glucose targets should be regularly revisited during clinical reviews and revised/new targets agreed to accommodate patients' concerns and difficulties. Other interventions may need to be considered to promote effective use of blood glucose targets.
Authors: Antonis A Kousoulis; Evridiki Patelarou; Sue Shea; Christina Foss; Ingrid A Ruud Knutsen; Elka Todorova; Poli Roukova; Mari Carmen Portillo; María J Pumar-Méndez; Agurtzane Mujika; Anne Rogers; Ivaylo Vassilev; Manuel Serrano-Gil; Christos Lionis Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-10-02 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Jackie Elliott; Julia Lawton; David Rankin; Celia Emery; Mike Campbell; Simon Dixon; Simon Heller Journal: BMC Endocr Disord Date: 2012-11-08 Impact factor: 2.763
Authors: Fiona Campbell; Julia Lawton; David Rankin; Mark Clowes; Elizabeth Coates; Simon Heller; Nicole de Zoysa; Jackie Elliott; Jenna P Breckenridge Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 2.655