| Literature DB >> 32182755 |
Noorfariza Nordin1, Suhaily Mohd Hairon1, Najib Majdi Yaacob2, Anees Abdul Hamid3, Norzaihan Hassan4.
Abstract
The implementation of Family Doctor Concept (FDC) to restructure the primary healthcare systems in Malaysia were expected to enhance patient's satisfaction on doctor-patient interaction and subsequently improved glycaemic control among Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients. Thus, this study aims to determine the difference in doctor-patient interaction satisfaction between T2DM patients attended FDC-implemented clinic vs non-FDC clinics, and to determine the association between FDC-implemented clinic and doctor-patient interaction satisfaction towards glycaemic control. A cross-sectional study was conducted throughout 10 districts in Kelantan from February until May 2019 using interview-guided Skala Kepuasan Interaksi Perubatan-11 (SKIP-11) and proforma checklist. Data were analyzed using SPSS ver.24. Chi-square statistic used to determine the difference in doctor-patient interaction satisfaction between both clinics type. Multiple logistic regression used to examine the association between FDC-implemented clinic and doctor-patient interaction satisfaction towards glycaemic control. Twenty primary health clinics involved, and 772 T2DM patients recruited. FDC clinics attendees has higher proportion of satisfaction (40.1%) compared to non-FDC attendees (33.7%) (p = 0.070). Multiple logistic regression confirmed the association of FDC-implemented health clinics (Adj. OR 1.63, p = 0.021), and doctor-patients interaction satisfaction (Adj. OR 1.77, p = 0.005) towards glycaemic control. Hence, strengthening of FDC in primary healthcare and improve the doctor-patient interaction satisfaction were essential to escalate good glycaemic control.Entities:
Keywords: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus; doctor-patient interaction; family doctor concept; glycaemic control; patient satisfaction; primary healthcare
Year: 2020 PMID: 32182755 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17051765
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390