Top

BMC Health Services Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Care | Research article

Active participation of patients with type 2 diabetes in consultations with their primary care practice nurses – what helps and what hinders: a qualitative study

Authors: E. du Pon, A. T. Wildeboer, A. A. van Dooren, H. J. G. Bilo, N. Kleefstra, S. van Dulmen

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Background

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving primary care regularly visit their practice nurses (PNs). By actively participating during medical consultations, patients can better manage their disease, improving clinical outcomes and their quality of life. However, many patients with T2DM do not actively participate during medical consultations. To understand the factors affecting engagement of patients with T2DM, this study aimed to identify factors that help or hinder them from actively participating in consultations with their primary care PNs.

Methods

Two semi-structured focus groups and 12 semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with patients with T2DM (n = 20) who were undergoing treatment by primary care PNs. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a two-step approach derived from the context-mapping framework.

Results

Four factors were found to help encourage patients to actively participate in their consultation: developing trusting relationships with their PNs, having enough time in the appointment, deliberately preparing for consultations, and allowing for the presence of a spouse. Conversely, four factors were found to hinder patients from participating during consultations: lacking the need or motivation to participate, readjusting to a new PN, forgetting to ask questions, and ineffectively expressing their thoughts.

Conclusion

Patients lacked the skills necessary to adequately prepare for a consultation and achieve an active role. In addition, patients’ keen involvement appeared to benefit from a trusting relationship with their PNs. When active participation is impeded by barriers such as a lack of patient’s skills, facilitators should be introduced at an early stage.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials NTR4693 (July 16, 2014).

Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu. https://www.volksgezondheidenzorg.info/onderwerp/diabetes-mellitus/cijfers-context/huidige-situatie (in Dutch). Accessed 13 April 2016.

Rubin RR, Anderson RM, Funnell MM. Collaborative DiabetesCare. Pract Diebetol. 2002;21:29–32.

Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Ware JE Jr, Yano EM, Frank HJ. Patients' participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3:448–57.PubMedCrossRef

Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE Jr. Expanding patient involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 1985;102:520–8.PubMedCrossRef

Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Ware JE Jr. Assessing the effects of physician-patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease. Med Care 1989;27. 27(Suppl 3):110.PubMedCrossRef

Street RL, Millay B. Analyzing patient participation in medical encounters. Health Commun. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327027HC1301_06.PubMedCrossRef

Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European association for the study of diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2012. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc15-0812.CrossRefPubMed

Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decisionmaking in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med. 1999;49:651–61.PubMedCrossRef

Parchman ML, Zeber JE, Palmer RF. Participatory decision making, patient activation, medication adherence, and intermediate clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a STARNet study. Ann Fam Med. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1161.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Goetz K, Szecsenyi J, Campbell S, Rosemann T, Rueter G, Raum E, Brenner H, Miksch A. The importance of social support for people with type 2 diabetes - a qualitative study with general practitioners, practice nurses and patients. Psychosoc Med. 2012;9. https://doi.org/10.3205/psm000080.

11.

Lambe B, Collins C. A qualitative study of lifestyle counselling in general practice in Ireland. Fam Pract. 2010 Apr;27(2):219–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmp086.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Houweling ST, Kleefstra N, van Hateren KJ, Groenier KH, Meyboom-de Jong B, Bilo HJ. Can diabetes management be safely transferred to practice nurses in a primary care setting? A randomised controlled trial. J Clin Nurs. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03562.x.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Heiligers PJM, Noordman J, Korevaar JC, Dorsman S, Hingstman L, van Dulmen AM, et al. Praktijkondersteuners in de huisartspraktijk (POH’s), klaar voor de toekomst (in Dutch) [Practice nurses in general practice, ready for the future?]. 1st ed. Utrecht: NIVEL; 2012.

14.

Bensing JM, Tromp F, van Dulmen S, van den Brink-Muinen A, Verheul W, Schellevis FG. Shifts in doctor-patient communication between 1986 and 2002: a study of videotaped general practice consultations with hypertension patients. BMC Fam Prac. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-7-62.

15.

Dulmen S van, Bijnen E van. What makes them (not) talk about proper medication use with their patients? An analysis of the determinants of GP communication using reflective practice. Int J Person Centered Med 2011; https://doi.org/10.5750/ijpcm.v1i1.4 CrossRef

16.

van den Brink-Muinen A, van Dulmen A, Schellevis FG, Bensing JM. Tweede Nationale Studie naar ziekten en verrichtingen in de huisartspraktijk. Oog voor communicatie: huisarts-patiënt communicatie in Nederland (in Dutch) [Second Dutch national survey of general practice – focus on qualty of general practice care]. Utrecht: NIVEL; 2004.

17.

Noordman J, van der Weijden T, van Dulmen S. Effects of video-feedback on the communication, clinical competence and motivational interviewing skills of practice nurses: a pre-test posttest control group study. J Adv Nurs. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12376.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Joseph-Williams N, Elwyn G, Edwards A. Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Henselmans I, Heijmans M, Rademakers J, van Dulmen S. Participation of chronic patients in medical consultations: patients’ perceived efficacy, barriers and interest in support. Health Expect. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12206.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

20.

van Bruinessen IR, van Weel-Baumgarten EM, Gouw H, Zijlstra JM, Albada A, van Dulmen S. Barriers and facilitators to effective communication experienced by patients with malignant lumohoma at all stages after diagnosis. Psychooncology. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3352.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Loon MS, van Dijk-de Vries A, van der Weijden T, Elwyn G, Widdershoven GA. Ethical issues in cardiovascular risk management: patients need nurses' support. Nurs Ethics. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733013505313.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Frosch DL, May SG, Rendle KA, Tietbohl C, Elwyn G. Authoritarian physicians and patients' fear of being labeled 'difficult' among key obstacles to shared decision making. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0576.a.

23.

Halcomb EJ, Peters K, Davies D. A qualitative evaluation of New Zealand consumers perceptions of general practice nurses. BMC Fam Pract. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-14-26.

24.

Pooley CG, Gerrard C, Hollis S, Morton S, Astbury J. 'Oh it's a wonderful practice... you can talk to them': a qualitative study of patients' and health professionals' views on the management of type 2 diabetes. Health Soc Care Community. 2001;9(5):318–26.PubMedCrossRef

25.

du Pon E, Kleefstra N, van Dooren AA, Bilo HJG, van Dulmen AM. DESTINE: a practice-based intervention to increase empowerment in patients with type 2 diabetes - a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Manag. 2017;7(4):330–6.

26.

Nederlands Trial Register [Dutch trial register]. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4693 Accessed 12 Nov 2017.

27.

Beverly EA, Miller CK, Wray LA. Spousal support and food-related behavior change in middle-aged and older adults living with type 2 diabetes. Health Educ Behav. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198107299787.CrossRef

28.

Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ. Social environment and regimen adherence among type II diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1988;11:377–86.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Rad GS, Bakht LA, Feizi A, Mohebi S. Importance of social support in diabetes care. J Educ Health Promot. 2013. https://doi.org/10.4103/2277-9531.120864.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

30.

Visser FS, Stappers PJ, van der Lugt R, Sanders EB-N. Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880500135987.CrossRef

31.

Sanders EB-N, William CT. Harnessing people’s creativity: ideation and expression through visual communication. In focus groups: supportive effective product development. London: Taylor and Francis; 2001.

32.

Ritchie J, Lewis J. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage; 2003.

33.

Sandelowski M. The problem of rigor in qualitative research. ANS Avd Nurs Sci. 1986;8:27–37.CrossRef

34.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117.

35.

MAXQDA, software for qualitative data analysis, 1989-2010, VERBI software. Consult. Sozialforschung GmbH, Berlin-Marburg-Amöneburg, Germany.

36.

Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Tishelman C. SCRN communication team. A conceptual framework for patient-professional communication: an application to the cancer context. Psychooncology. 2005;14:801–9 discussion 810-1.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Seale C. Grounding theory. In: Seale C, editor. The quality of qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 1999. p. 87–105.CrossRef

38.

Wolff JL, Clayman ML, Rabins P, Cook MA, Roter DL. An exploration of patient and family engagement in routine primary care visits. Health Expect. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12019.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

39.

Peyrot M, Rubin RR, Lauritzen T, Snoek FJ, Matthews DR, Skovlund SE. Psychosocial problems and barriers to improved diabetes management: results of the Cross-National Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN) Study. Diabet Med 2005; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01644.x PubMedCrossRef

40.

Street RL Jr, Gordon HS. The clinical context and patient participation in post-diagnostic consultations. Patient Educ Couns. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2006.02.004.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Takayama T, Yamazaki Y. How breast cancer outpatients perceive mutual participation in patient-physician interactions. Patient Educ Couns. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00092-2.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Gorter KJ, Tuytel GH, De Leeuw RRJ, Rutten GEHM. Huisarts of ketenzorg: wat wilde de diabetespatiënt? (in Dutch) [Who should treat diabetes patients?]. Huisarts Wet. 2011;54:238–43.CrossRef

43.

van AL P, Heijmans MJ, Rijken M, Rutten GE, Nijpels G, Schellevis FG. Illness perceptions and self-care behaviours in the first years of living with type 2 diabetes; does the presence of complications matter? Psychol Health. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2015.1045511.CrossRef

44.

van Dijk-de Vries A, van Bokhoven MA, de Jong S, et al. Patients' readiness to receive psychosocial care during nurse-led routine diabetes consultations in primary care: a mixed methods study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.08.018.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Jansink R, Braspenning J, van der Weijden T, Elwyn G, Grol R. Primary care nurses struggle with lifestyle counseling in diabetes care: a qualitative analysis. BMC Fam Pract. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-11-41.

46.

Wildeboer A, du Pon E, Schuling J, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Denig P. Views of general practice staff about the use of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid in shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes: a mixed-methods study. Health Expect. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12586.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

47.

Makoul G, Clayman ML. An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.010.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Van Dulmen S, Sluijs E, van Dijk L, et al. Furthering patient adherence: a position paper of the international expert forum on patient adherence based on an internet forum discussion. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-47.

49.

Giacomini MK, Cook DJ. Users’ Guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 2000;284:357–62.PubMedCrossRef

50.

Lambert SD, Loiselle CG. Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. J Adv Nurs. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04559.x.PubMedCrossRef

51.

Halcomb EJ, Andrew S. Triangulation as a method for contemporary nursing research. Nurse Res. 2005. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2005.10.13.2.71.c5969.PubMed

52.

Adami MF. The use of triangulation for completeness purposes. Nurse Res. 2005;12:19–29.PubMedCrossRef

53.

Taylor B. The experience of overseas nurses working in the NHS: result of a qualitative study. Div Health Soc Care. 2005;2:17–27.

54.

van Weert J, Jansen J, Spreeuwenberg P, van Dulmen S, Bensing J. Effects of communication skills training and a question prompt sheet to improve communication with older cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011;80:145–15.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Active participation of patients with type 2 diabetes in consultations with their primary care practice nurses – what helps and what hinders: a qualitative study
Authors: E. du Pon
A. T. Wildeboer
A. A. van Dooren
H. J. G. Bilo
N. Kleefstra
S. van Dulmen
Publication date: 01-12-2019
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Care
Type 2 Diabetes
Published in: BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4572-5

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Active participation of patients with type 2 diabetes in consultations with their primary care practice nurses – what helps and what hinders: a qualitative study

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

The effectiveness of prescription drug monitoring programs at reducing opioid-related harms and consequences: a systematic review

Supporting respiratory patients in primary care: a qualitative insight from independent community pharmacists in London

Differences in the quality of oral anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists in German GP practices – results of the cluster-randomized PICANT trial (Primary Care Management for Optimized Antithrombotic Treatment)

Strengthening primary health care at district-level in Malawi - determining the coverage, costs and benefits of community-directed interventions

Transforming community nursing services in the UK; lessons from a participatory evaluation of the implementation of a new community nursing model in East London based on the principles of the Dutch Buurtzorg model

Participation in the state led ‘Janani Sahayogi Yojana’ public private partnership program to promote facility births in Madhya Pradesh, India: views from private obstetrician partners