Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31703680›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2019

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

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

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

E du PonResearch Group Process Innovations in Pharmaceutical Care, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 12011, 3501 AA, Utrecht, the Netherlands. esther.dupon@hu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2728-3760
A T WildeboerDepartment of Health Science, Section of Nursing Research, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, the Netherlands.
A A van DoorenResearch Group Process Innovations in Pharmaceutical Care, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 12011, 3501 AA, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
H J G BiloDiabetes Centre, Isala, Zwolle, Dr. Spanjaardweg 11, 8025 BT, Zwolle, the Netherlands.
N KleefstraDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, the Netherlands.
S van DulmenNivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), Otterstraat 118, 3513 CR, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients 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.

methodsTwo 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.

resultsFour 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.

conclusionPatients 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 registrationCurrent Controlled Trials NTR4693 (July 16, 2014).

Indexed as

Nurse-Patient RelationsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationNurse PractitionersPatient ParticipationPrimary Care NursingQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeReferral and ConsultationDiabetes carePatient–nurse communicationPatient participationPractice nursePrimary careType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID31703680
PMCPMC6839213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.