BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to explore perceptions and strategies of health care providers regarding diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy (LHL), and to compare their self-management support with the needs of patients with LHL and type 2 diabetes. This study serves as a problem analysis for systematic intervention development to improve diabetes self-management among patients with LHL. METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews with general practitioners (n = 4), nurse practitioners (n = 5), and patients with LHL (n = 31). The results of the interviews with health care providers guided the patient interviews. In addition, we observed 10 general practice consultations. RESULTS: Providers described patients with LHL as uninvolved and less motivated patients who do not understand self-management. Their main strategy to improve self-management was to provide standard information on a repeated basis. Patients with LHL seemed to have a different view of diabetes self-management than their providers. Most demonstrated a low awareness of what self-management involves, but did not express needing more information. They reported several practical barriers to self-management, although they seemed reluctant to use the information provided to overcome them. CONCLUSIONS: Providing and repeating information does not fit the needs of patients with LHL regarding diabetes self-management support. Health care providers do not seem to have the insight or the tools to systematically support diabetes self-management in this group. Systematic intervention development with a focus on skills-based approaches rather than cognition development may improve diabetes self-management support of patients with LHL.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to explore perceptions and strategies of health care providers regarding diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy (LHL), and to compare their self-management support with the needs of patients with LHL and type 2 diabetes. This study serves as a problem analysis for systematic intervention development to improve diabetes self-management among patients with LHL. METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews with general practitioners (n = 4), nurse practitioners (n = 5), and patients with LHL (n = 31). The results of the interviews with health care providers guided the patient interviews. In addition, we observed 10 general practice consultations. RESULTS: Providers described patients with LHL as uninvolved and less motivated patients who do not understand self-management. Their main strategy to improve self-management was to provide standard information on a repeated basis. Patients with LHL seemed to have a different view of diabetes self-management than their providers. Most demonstrated a low awareness of what self-management involves, but did not express needing more information. They reported several practical barriers to self-management, although they seemed reluctant to use the information provided to overcome them. CONCLUSIONS: Providing and repeating information does not fit the needs of patients with LHL regarding diabetes self-management support. Health care providers do not seem to have the insight or the tools to systematically support diabetes self-management in this group. Systematic intervention development with a focus on skills-based approaches rather than cognition development may improve diabetes self-management support of patients with LHL.
Authors: Roshni Devchand; Christina Nicols; Joanne M Gallivan; Margaret Tiktin; Heidi Krause-Steinrauf; Mary Larkin; Diane M Tuncer Journal: J Am Assoc Nurse Pract Date: 2017-02-18 Impact factor: 1.165
Authors: Jared W Magnani; Mahasin S Mujahid; Herbert D Aronow; Crystal W Cené; Victoria Vaughan Dickson; Edward Havranek; Lewis B Morgenstern; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Amy Pollak; Joshua Z Willey Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mirjam Jager; Andrea den Boeft; Susanne Leij-Halfwerk; Rob van der Sande; Maria van den Muijsenbergh Journal: Health Expect Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 3.377