Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose When not Using Insulin: a Cross-sectional Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Professional societies have recommended against use of self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (NITT2D) to control blood sugar levels, but patients are still monitoring.

Objective

To understand patients' motivation to monitor their blood sugar, and whether they would stop if their physician suggested it.

Design

Cross-sectional in-person and electronic survey conducted between 2018 and 2020.

Participants

Adults with type 2 diabetes not using insulin who self-monitor their blood sugar.

Main measures

The survey included questions about frequency and reason for using SMBG, and the impact of SMBG on quality of life and worry. It also asked, "If your doctor said you could stop checking your blood sugar, would you?" We categorized patients based on whether they would stop. To identify the characteristics independently associated with desire to stop SMBG, we performed a logistic regression using backward stepwise selection.

Key results

We received 458 responses. The common reasons for using SMBG included the doctor wanted the patient to check (67%), desire to see the number (65%), and desire to see if their medications were working (61%). Forty-eight percent of respondents stated that using SMBG reduced their worry about their diabetes and 61% said it increased their quality of life. Fifty percent would stop using SMBG if given permission. In the regression model, respondents who said that they check their blood sugar levels because "I was told to" were more likely to want to stop (AOR: 1.69, 95%CI: 1.11, 2.58). Those that used SMBG due to habit and to understand their diabetes better had lower odds of wanting to stop (AOR: 0.33, 95%CI: 0.18-0.62; AOR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.39-0.93, respectively).

Conclusions

Primary care physicians should discuss patients' reasons for using SMBG and offer them the option of discontinuing.

SUBMITTER: Pfoh ER

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9130377 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient Perspectives on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose When not Using Insulin: a Cross-sectional Survey.

Pfoh Elizabeth R ER Linfield Debra D Speaker Sidra L SL Roufael Joud S JS Yan Chen C Misra-Hebert Anita D AD Rothberg Michael B MB

Journal of general internal medicine 20210813 7

<h4>Background</h4>Professional societies have recommended against use of self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (NITT2D) to control blood sugar levels, but patients are still monitoring.<h4>Objective</h4>To understand patients' motivation to monitor their blood sugar, and whether they would stop if their physician suggested it.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional in-person and electronic survey conducted between 2018 and 2020.<h4>Participants</h4>Adults with type ...[more]

PMID: 34389935

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe application of artificial intelligence (AI) to health and health care is rapidly increasing. Several studies have assessed the attitudes of health professionals, but far fewer studies have explored the perspectives of patients or the general public. Studies investigating patient perspectives have focused on somatic issues, including those related to radiology, perinatal health, and general applications. Patient feedback has been elicited in the development of specific mental health care solutions, but broader perspectives toward AI for mental health care have been underexplored.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand public perceptions regarding potential benefits of AI, concerns about AI, comfort with AI accomplishing various tasks, and values related to AI, all pertaining to mental health care.MethodsWe conducted a 1-time cross-sectional survey with a nationally representative sample of 500 US-based adults. Participants provided structured responses on their perceived benefits, concerns, comfort, and values regarding AI for mental health care. They could also add free-text responses to elaborate on their concerns and values.ResultsA plurality of participants (245/497, 49.3%) believed AI may be beneficial for mental health care, but this perspective differed based on sociodemographic variables (all P<.05). Specifically, Black participants (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% CI 1.03-3.05) and those with lower health literacy (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.29-3.78) perceived AI to be more beneficial, and women (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46-0.99) perceived AI to be less beneficial. Participants endorsed concerns about accuracy, possible unintended consequences such as misdiagnosis, the confidentiality of their information, and the loss of connection with their health professional when AI is used for mental health care. A majority of participants (80.4%, 402/500) valued being able to understand individual factors driving their risk, confidentiality, and autonomy as it pertained to the use of AI for their mental health. When asked who was responsible for the misdiagnosis of mental health conditions using AI, 81.6% (408/500) of participants found the health professional to be responsible. Qualitative results revealed similar concerns related to the accuracy of AI and how its use may impact the confidentiality of patients' information.ConclusionsFuture work involving the use of AI for mental health care should investigate strategies for conveying the level of AI's accuracy, factors that drive patients' mental health risks, and how data are used confidentially so that patients can determine with their health professionals when AI may be beneficial. It will also be important in a mental health care context to ensure the patient-health professional relationship is preserved when AI is used.

Project description:BackgroundWhile the lung cancer (LC) treatment landscape has rapidly evolved in recent years, easing symptom burden and treatment side effects remain central considerations in disease control.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the relative importance of dimensions of LC care to patients, and to explore the disease burden, including socioeconomic aspects not commonly covered in patient-reported outcomes instruments.MethodsA questionnaire was sent to patients with LC and their caregivers to rate the value of a diverse set of quality of life dimensions in care, to evaluate communication between health care professionals (HCPs) and patients, and to explore the economic impact on respondents. The survey included questions on the dimensions of care covered by patient-reported outcomes instruments for quality-of-life evaluation (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung scale, EQ-5D, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Core Quality of Life questionnaire, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Core Quality of Life in lung cancer 13-item questionnaire), as well as the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) standard set of patient-centered outcomes for LC. The survey respondents were participants on Carenity's patient community platform, living either in France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, or Spain.ResultsThe survey included 150 respondents (115 patients and 35 caregivers). "Physical well-being" and "end-of-life care" (median scores of 9.6, IQR 7.7-10, and 9.7, IQR 8.0-10, on a 10-point scale) were rated highest among the different value dimensions assessed. "Physical well-being and functioning" was the dimension most frequently discussed with health care professionals (82/150, 55%), while only (17/100, 17%) reported discussing "end-of-life care." After diagnosis, 43% (49/112) of patients younger than 65 years stopped working. Among respondents who indicated their monthly household income before and after diagnosis, 55% (38/69) reported a loss of income.ConclusionsOur results showed the relevance of a broad range of aspects of care for the quality of life of patients with LC. End-of-life care was the dimension of care rated highest by patients with LC, irrespective of stage at diagnosis; however, this aspect is least frequently discussed with HCPs. The results also highlight the considerable socioeconomic impact of the disease, despite insurance coverage of direct costs.

Project description:Insulin is essential for the survival of people with type 1 diabetes and for better management of people with type 2 diabetes. People with diabetes using insulin also require self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) devices (e.g., meters, strips, continuous monitoring systems) for day-to-day management. It is essential to ensure that insulin and these devices are available and affordable. This study aimed to evaluate the availability, price, and affordability of insulin and SMBG devices in Indonesia using an adaptation of the World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) price survey. A total of 34 public health facilities (hospitals, primary healthcare centres/Puskesmas) and 37 private pharmacies were sampled. Information from three major online marketplaces was also collected. Prices were expressed as median patient prices (US$). Affordability was defined as the number of days' wages needed by the lowest paid unskilled government worker (LPGW) to purchase 30 days' supply of insulin, delivery devices and SMBGs. Availability of analogue insulin was slightly higher in public facilities (63.6%) than in the private sector (43.2%), with no human insulin available in both sectors. Conversely, better availability was observed in private facilities for SMBG devices as public sector facilities did not supply devices for self-testing. Median prices for 1000IU analogues varied between the public sector (US$ 5.26) and the private sector (US$11.24). The highest median price of analogues was seen in online marketplaces (US$ 28.65). The least costly median price of SMBG devices were observed in online platforms (meter: US$ 18.37, test strip: US$ 0.27, lancet: US$ 0.02). A low-income person had to work 2-3 days to buy 1000IU of analogues. It required 5-7 days' and 4-5 day's wages to purchase a meter and a month's supply of test strips, respectively. The availability and affordability of insulin and SMBG devices remain important issues in Indonesia requiring holistic approaches for further improvement.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in the diagnosis and management of hypertension in primary care settings in the United States is increasing. Insufficient information is available describing patients' experiences and acceptance of this technology in the United States, where medical insurance coverage of the procedure is often limited. The objective of this study was to describe patient satisfaction with ABPM performed in a primary care office in the United States, using modern ABPM technology.MethodsCross-sectional survey performed on consecutive patients referred to the ABPM service of the Family Care Center, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa from January 2001 to July 2003. Measures of patient satisfaction and acceptance with the device, comfort, and overall session were assessed via a 9-question, Likert-scale response survey.ResultsSince its inception two and a half years ago, 245 total ABPM sessions have been conducted in 235 unique patients. Of the 235 eligible respondents, 177 returned completed surveys, yielding a 75% response rate. Three-fourths (75%) of patients believed that undergoing the test was worthwhile considering the time and monetary cost involved, while most (90%) reported they thought the information provided by the test would be helpful to their physician in making treatment decisions. Patients reporting that their physician had clearly explained the benefit of undergoing the testing were more likely to report that they thought the results of the test would be more helpful in making treatment decisions. Few patients (20%) found that wearing the monitor was uncomfortable.ConclusionsWhen clinically indicated, clinicians should not hesitate to order ABPM testing for fear of subjecting patients to an uncomfortable test, or an uncovered insurance benefit. When ordering ABPM, they should be sure to educate the patient about the potential benefits of undergoing the testing. Most patients believe the test will provide useful information in making treatment decisions, despite probable lack of insurance coverage, and appear willing to experience some discomfort for the overall gain of the results obtained from undergoing the session.

Project description:ObjectiveThere is increasing awareness of the burden of medical care experienced by those with multimorbidity. There is also increasing interest and activity in engaging patients with chronic disease in technology-based health-related activities ('eHealth') in family practice. Little is known about patients' access to, and interest in eHealth, in particular those with a higher burden of care associated with multimorbidity. We examined access and attitudes towards eHealth among patients attending family medicine clinics with a focus on older adults and those with polypharmacy as a marker for multimorbidity.DesignCross-sectional survey of consecutive adult patients attending consultations with family physicians in the McMaster University Sentinel and Information Collaboration practice-based research network. We used univariate and multivariate analyses for quantitative data, and thematic analysis for free text responses.SettingPrimary care clinics.Participants693 patients participated (response rate 70%).Inclusion criteriaAttending primary care clinic.ExclusionsToo ill to complete survey, cannot speak English.ResultsThe majority of participants reported access to the internet at home, although this decreased with age. Participants 70 years and older were less comfortable using the internet compared with participants under 70. Univariate analyses showed age, multimorbidity, home internet access, comfort using the internet, privacy concerns and self-rated health all predicted significantly less interest in eHealth. In the multivariate analysis, home internet access and multimorbidity were significant predictors of disinterest in eHealth. Privacy and loss of relational connection were themes in the qualitative analysis.ConclusionThere is a significant negative association between multimorbidity and interest in eHealth. This is independent of age, computer use and comfort with using the internet. These findings have important implications, particularly the potential to further increase health inequity.

Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose When not Using Insulin: a Cross-sectional Survey.

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Main measures

Key results

Conclusions

Publications

Patient Perspectives on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose When not Using Insulin: a Cross-sectional Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets