Engaging GPs in insulin therapy initiation: a qualitative study evaluating a support program in the Belgian context

Capacity and confidence building for general practitioners on optimum insulin use

Type 2 diabetes is characterised by a progressive decline in insulin secretion, and sooner or later patients require insulin therapy. However, physicians are reluctant to initiate insulin therapy because of perceived inadequacy in managing insulin therapy, cost and lack of benefits. Experts from across the country met at a workshop during 12th National Insulin Summit which was held in September at Hyderabad and came up with key recommendations to build capacity and confidence in general practitioners for insulin usage. Barriers can be overcome through self-education and training; effective patient education; imparting coping skill training to patients; and bridging gaps to improve adherence. Moreover, optimum insulinization requires knowledge about the available options for initiation and intensification of insulin therapy; various insulin regimens; dosing and titration; and choosing effective and simple insulin therapy as per patient characteristics. Hence, the objective of this review article is to help build capacity and confidence among general practitioners on optimising insulin therapy.

Intensification to injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes: mixed methods study (protocol)

BACKGROUND

In the UK, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is largely managed in primary care. Delay in the intensification to injectable therapy, a form of clinical inertia, is associated with worse glycaemic control. UK general practice is highly computerised, with care being recorded on computerised medical record systems; this allows for quantitative analysis of clinical care but not of the underpinning decision-making process. The aim of this study is to investigate perceptions of patients and clinicians in primary care on the initiation of injectable therapies in T2D, and the context within which those decisions are made.

METHODS

This is a mixed methods study, taking a "realist evaluation" approach. The qualitative components comprise focus groups, interviews, and video recordings of simulated surgeries; the quantitative analysis: an overview of participating practices, elements of the video recording, and an online survey. We will recruit primary care clinicians (general practitioners and nurses) and patients from a representative sample of practices within the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) network. Participants will be patients with T2D, and primary care clinicians. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. The simulated surgeries will include cases that might be escalated to injectable therapy. The consultation will be reviewed using the Calgary-Cambridge model to assess communication and determination of adherence to national prescribing guidelines. We will conduct multi-channel video recording including screen capture, clinician and patient facial expressions, wide angle view of the consultation, and the computerised medical record screen. This allows annotation and qualitative analysis of the video recordings, and statistical analyses for the quantitative data. We will also conduct an online survey of primary care clinicians' attitudes to, and perceptions of, initiation of injectable therapies, which will be analysed using summary statistics.

DISCUSSION

Results aim to provide a detailed insight into the dynamic two-way decision-making process underpinning use of injectable therapy for T2D. The study will provide insights into clinical practice and enable the development of training, interventions and guidelines that may facilitate, where appropriate, the intensification to injectable therapy.

A systematic review of experiences of advanced practice nursing in general practice

Background

Despite efforts to achieve conceptual clarity, advanced practice nursing continues to reside in a liminal space, unable to secure ongoing recognition as a viable means of healthcare delivery. This is particularly evident in general practice where advanced practice role development is more fluid and generally less supported by the hierarchical structures evident in the hospital system. This review synthesises published qualitative studies reporting experiences of advanced practice nursing in general practice. The panoramic view provided by patients, nurses and doctors within this novel context, offers a fresh perspective on why advanced practice nurses have struggled to gain acceptance within the healthcare milieu.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies that explored the experiences of patients, nurses and doctors who had contact with advanced practice nurses working in general practice. Published work from 1990 to June 2016 was located using CINAHL and PubMed. The full text of relevant studies was retrieved after reading the title and abstract. Critical appraisal was undertaken and the findings of included studies were analysed using the constant comparative method. Emergent codes were collapsed into sub-themes and themes.

Results

Twenty articles reporting the experiences of 486 participants were included. We identified one major theme: legitimacy; and three sub-themes: (1) establishing and maintaining confidence in the advanced practice nurse, (2) strengthening and weakening boundaries between general practitioners and advanced practice nurses and (3) establishing and maintaining the value of advanced practice nursing.

Conclusions

We set out to describe experiences of advanced practice nursing in general practice. We discovered that general practitioners and patients continue to have concerns around responsibility, trust and accountability. Additionally, advanced practice nurses struggle to negotiate and clarify scopes of practice while general practitioners have trouble justifying the costs associated with advanced practice nursing roles. Therefore, much work remains to establish and maintain the legitimacy of advanced practice nursing in general practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12912-016-0198-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Barriers that practitioners face when initiating insulin therapy in general practice settings and how they can be overcome

AIM

To explore primary care physicians’ perspectives on possible barriers to the use of insulin.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight electronic databases were searched (between January 1, 1994 and August 31, 2014) for relevant studies. A search for grey literature and a review of the references in the retrieved studies were also conducted. Studies that focused on healthcare providers’ perspectives on possible barriers to insulin initiation with type 2 diabetic patients were included, as well as articles suggesting solutions for these barriers. Review articles and studies that only considered patients’ perspectives were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria and were therefore included in this study: 10 of these studies used qualitative methods, 8 used quantitative methods and 1 used mixed methods. Studies included a range of different health care settings. The findings are reported under four broad categories: The perceptions of primary care physicians about the barriers to initiate insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes patients, how primary care physicians assess patients prior to initiating insulin, professional roles and possible solutions to overcome these barriers. The barriers described were many and covered doctor, patient, system and technological aspects. Interventions that focused on doctor training and support, or IT-based decision support were few, and did not result in significant improvement.

CONCLUSION

Primary care physicians’ known delay in insulin initiation is multifactorial. Published reports of attempts to find solutions for these barriers were limited in number.

Poor glycemic control as a reason for referral of diabetes patients to specialists in Israel

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Family physicians face the dilemma of when to refer patients with diabetes to specialists. This study examined attitudes of family physicians to referring patients with poor glucose control to diabetes specialists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

At continuous medical education courses, family physicians were asked to respond anonymously, as to whether they generally manage the diabetes of their patients, and specifically those with poor glycemic control (HbA1c>9.0%).

RESULTS

Of 470 respondents, 426 (90%) reported that they generally manage their patients' diabetes; 202 (43%) reported that they manage the diabetes of patients with HbA1c>9.0%. Board certification in family medicine and affiliation to a health maintenance organization, but not sex, age, years of professional experience, or the proportion of patients with diabetes at their clinics, were associated with referral practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Family medicine residency and organizational support appear to promote treatment by family physicians of patients with poorly controlled diabetes in the primary care setting.

Optimizing insulin initiation in primary care: the Diabetes CoStars patient support program

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the optimization of fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus newly initiated on insulin glargine who were enrolled in the Australian Diabetes CoStars Patient Support Program (PSP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data from 514 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who completed the 12-week Diabetes CoStars PSP was performed. All patients were initiated on insulin glargine in primary care and enrolled by their general practitioner, who selected a predefined titration plan and support from a local Credentialled Diabetes Educator. The data collected included initial and final insulin dose, self-reported FBG, and glycated hemoglobin (A1c) levels.

RESULTS

The insulin dose increased in 81% of patients. Mean FBG was reduced from 208.8 mg/dL (11.6 mmol/L) to 136.8 mg/dL (7.6 mmol/L) after 12 weeks. Initial and final A1c values were available for 99 patients; mean A1c was reduced from 9.5% (80 mmol/mol) to 8.1% (65 mmol/mol). The reductions in mean FBG and A1c were similar irrespective of titration plan. Overall, 27.2% of patients achieved FBG levels within the titration plan target range of 72-108 mg/dL (4-6 mmol/L) and an additional 43.4% of patients achieved FBG within the range recommended by current Australian guidelines (110-144 mg/dL [6.1-8.0 mmol/L]). Overall, 23.3% of patients achieved the A1c target of ≤7%.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that the majority of patients enrolled in the Diabetes CoStars PSP achieved acceptable FBG levels 12 weeks after starting insulin therapy irrespective of titration plan.