Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Insulins | Research

Socioeconomic disparities in access to intensive insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study of patient and healthcare professional perspectives

Authors: Anne Scott, Alicia O’Cathain, Elizabeth Goyder

Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Type 1 diabetes is a complex chronic condition which requires lifelong treatment with insulin. Health outcomes are dependent on ability to self-manage the condition. Socioeconomic inequalities have been demonstrated in access to treatment and health outcomes for adults with type 1 diabetes; however, there is a paucity of research exploring how these disparities occur. This study explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in gaining access to intensive insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes.

Methods

We undertook a qualitative descriptive study informed by a phenomenological perspective. In-depth face-to-face interviews were conducted with 28 patients and 6 healthcare professionals involved in their care. The interviews were analysed using a thematic approach. The Candidacy theory for access to healthcare for vulnerable groups framed the analysis.

Results

Access to intensive insulin regimens was through hospital-based specialist services in this sample. Patients from lower socioeconomic groups had difficulty accessing hospital-based services if they were in low paid work and because they lacked the ability to navigate the healthcare system. Once these patients were in the specialist system, access to intensive insulin regimens was limited by non-alignment with healthcare professional goals, poor health literacy, psychosocial problems and poor quality communication. These factors could also affect access to structured diabetes education which itself improved access to intensive insulin regimens. Contact with diabetes specialist nurses and attendance at structured diabetes education courses could ameliorate these barriers.

Conclusions

Access to intensive insulin regimens was hindered for people in lower socioeconomic groups by a complex mix of factors relating to the permeability of specialist services, ability to navigate the healthcare system and patient interactions with healthcare providers. Improving access to diabetes specialist nurses and structured diabetes education for vulnerable patients could lessen socioeconomic disparities in both access to services and health outcomes.
Literature
1.
DAFNE Study Group. Training in flexible, intensive insulin management to enable dietary freedom in people with type 1 diabetes: dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) randomised controlled trial. Br Med J. 2002;325:746.CrossRef
2.
3.
Sharp P, Walton C. Type 1 diabetes: not lost but possibly misplaced. Practical Diabetes. 2012;29:308–9.CrossRef
4.
5.
6.
7.
Townsend P, Davidson N. Inequalities in health: the black report. London: Penguin Books; 1988.
8.
Whitehead M. The health divide. London: Pelican Books; 1988.
9.
10.
DCCT Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1989;329:977–6.
11.
Scott A, Chambers D, Goyder E, O'Cathain A. Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality, morbidity and diabetes management for adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0177210.CrossRef
12.
Mühlhauser I, Overmann H, Bender R, Bott U, Jorgens V, Trautner C, Siegrist J, Berger M. Social status and the quality of care for adult people with type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus--a population-based study. Diabetologia. 1998;41:1139–50.CrossRef
13.
Chaturvedi N, Stephenson JM, Fuller JH. The relationship between socioeconomic status and diabetes control and complications in the EURODIAB IDDM complications study. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:423–30.CrossRef
14.
Zgibor JC, Songer TJ, Kelsey SF, Weissfeld J, Drash AL, Becker D, Orchard TJ. The association of diabetes specialist care with health care practices and glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional analysis from the Pittsburgh epidemiology of diabetes complications study. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:472–6.CrossRef
15.
Brown AF, Ettner SL, Piette J, Weinberger M, Gregg E, Shapiro MF, Karter AJ, Safford M, Waitzfelder B, Prata PA, Beckles GL. Socioeconomic position and health among persons with diabetes mellitus: a conceptual framework and review of the literature. Epidemiol Rev. 2004;26:63–77.CrossRef
16.
Gulliford M. Equity and access to health care. In: Gulliford M, Morgan M, editors. Access to Health Care. London: Routledge; 2003. p. 36–60.
17.
Zgibor JC, Songer TJ. External barriers to diabetes care: addressing personal and health systems issues. Diabetes Spectrum. 2001;14:23–8.CrossRef
18.
19.
Pickup JC. Are insulin pumps underutilized in type 1 diabetes? Yes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1449–52.CrossRef
20.
Cortina S, Repaske DR, Hood KK. Sociodemographic and psychosocial factors associated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes. 2010;11:337–44.CrossRef
21.
Wood J, Lin M, Connor C, Ruedy K, Beck R, Kollman C, Buckingham B, Redondo MJ, Schatz D, Haro H, et al. Race and socioeconomic status are associated with insulin pump therapy in youth in the first year following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15:A25–6.
22.
Goddard M. Access to health care services--an English policy perspective. Health Economics, Policy, & Law. 2009;4:195–208.CrossRef
23.
Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, Annandale E, Arthur A, Harvey J, Hsu R, Katbamna S, Olsen R, Smith L, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:35.
24.
Andersen RM. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: does it matter? J Health Soc Behav. 1995;36:1–10.CrossRef
25.
Babitsch B, Gohl D, von Lengerke T. Re-revisiting Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use: a systematic review of studies from 1998–2011. Psycho-Social Medicine. 2012;9:Doc11.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
27.
28.
Penchansky R, Thomas JW. The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Med Care. 1981;19:127–40.CrossRef
29.
30.
Kovandžić M, Chew-Graham C, Reeve J, Edwards S, Peters S, Edge D, Aseem S, Gask L, Dowrick C. Access to primary mental health care for hard-to-reach groups: from 'silent suffering' to 'making it work'. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72:763–72.CrossRef
31.
Bristow K, Edwards S, Funnel E, Fisher L, Gask L, Dowrick C, G CC. Help seeking and access to primary care for people from "hard-to-reach" groups with common mental health rproblems. Int J Fam Med Print. 2011;2011:490634.
32.
O'Cathain A, Coleman P, Nicholl J. Characteristics of the emergency and urgent care system important to patients: a qualitative study. Journal of Health Services & Research Policy. 2008;13(Suppl-2):19-25.
33.
Hunter C, Chew-Graham C, Langer S, Stenhoff A, Drinkwater J, Guthrie E, Salmon P. A qualitative study of patient choices in using emergency health care for long-term conditions: the importance of candidacy and recursivity. Patient Education & Counseling. 2013;93:335–41.CrossRef
34.
Bradshaw C, Atkinson S, Doody O. Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2017;4:2333393617742282.PubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Sandelowski M. Focus on research methods: whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health. 2000;23:334–40.CrossRef
36.
Sandelowski M. What's in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health. 2010;33:77–84.
37.
Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2002.
38.
Sullivan-Bolyai S, Bova C, Harper D. Developing and refining interventions in persons with health disparities: the use of qualitative description. Nurs Outlook. 2005;53:127–33.CrossRef
39.
Murphy E, Dingwall R, Greatbatch D, Parker S, Watson P. Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2(16):iii-ix:1-274.
40.
Snape D, l S. The foundations of qualitative research. In: R J, L J, editors. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Scientists and Researchers. London: Sage; 2003. p. 1–23.
41.
Galobardes B, Shaw M, Lawlor DA, Lynch JW, Davey Smith G. Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1). J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60(1):7–12.CrossRef
42.
Rose D, Pevalin DJ. A Researcher’s guide to the national statistics socio-economic classification. London: Sage; 2003.CrossRef
43.
44.
45.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRef
46.
l S, J R, O'Connor W. Analysis: practices, principles and processes. In: R J, L J, editors. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London: Sage; 2003. p. 199–218.
47.
Hamilton W, Round A, Sharp D. Patient, hospital, and general practitioner characteristics associated with non-attendance: a cohort study. Br J Gen Pract. 2002;52:317–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Sharp DJ, Hamilton W. Non-attendance at general practices and outpatient clinics. BMJ. 2001;323:1081–2.CrossRef
49.
Elders V, Keen A, Gold A. Adults with type 1 diabetes: what factors are associated with disengagement from health services. Practical Diabetes. 2014;31:117–118a.CrossRef
50.
Snow R, Fulop N. Understanding issues associated with attending a young adult diabetes clinic: a case study. Diabet Med. 2012;29:257–9.CrossRef
51.
Richards G, Morris M, Booker S, Johnson A. What do people with type 1 diabetes find helpful in health professionals? Results from a focus group study. Practical Diabetes Int. 2006;23:249–52.CrossRef
52.
Wikblad KF. Patient perspectives of diabetes care and education. J Adv Nurs. 1991;16:837–44.CrossRef
53.
Brierley S, Eiser C, Johnson B, Young V, Heller S. Working with young adults with type 1 diabetes: views of a multidisciplinary care team and implications for service delivery. Diabet Med. 2012;29:677–81.CrossRef
54.
55.
Lawton J, Kirkham J, Rankin D, White DA, Elliott J, Jaap A, Smithson WH, Heller S, Group R. Who gains clinical benefit from using insulin pump therapy? A qualitative study of the perceptions and views of health professionals involved in the relative effectiveness of pumps over MDI and structured education (REPOSE) trial. Diabet Med. 2016;33:243–51.CrossRef
56.
Stenner KL, Courtenay M, Carey N. Consultations between nurse prescribers and patients with diabetes in primary care: a qualitative study of patient views. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011;48:37–46.CrossRef
57.
Bäz L, Muller N, Beluchin E, Kloos C, Lehmann T, Wolf G, Müller UA. Differences in the quality of diabetes care caused by social inequalities disappear after treatment and education in a tertiary care Centre. Diabet Med. 2012;29:640–5.CrossRef
58.
Rankin D, Cooke DD, Elliott J, Heller SR, Lawton J. Supporting self-management after attending a structured education programme: a qualitative longitudinal investigation of type 1 diabetes patients' experiences and views. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:652.
Metadata
Title
Socioeconomic disparities in access to intensive insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study of patient and healthcare professional perspectives
Authors
Anne Scott
Alicia O’Cathain
Elizabeth Goyder
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1475-9276
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-019-1061-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research

Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in stunting prevalence in Latin America and the Caribbean countries: differences between quintiles and deciles

Research

Socioeconomic inequalities in low back pain among older people: the JAGES cross-sectional study

Research

Socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health care utilization in Ghana

Research

The social determinants of chronic disease management: perspectives of elderly patients with hypertension from low socio-economic background in Singapore

Research

The mismeasurement of complexity: provider narratives of patients with complex needs in primary care settings

Research

Effects of an empowerment program for survivors of sexual violence on attitudes and beliefs: evidence from the Democratic Republic of Congo