Adaption, translation and validation of the Diabetes Mellitus in the Offspring Questionnaire (DMOQ): The Malay version.

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Mellitus in the Offspring Questionnaire (DMOQ) assesses the perceptions of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients on the risk of their offspring developing T2DM and the possibility of intervention to reduce this risk. It has 34 items framed within seven domains. This study aimed to adapt, translate and validate the DMOQ from English into the Malay language. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional validation study among 159 T2DM patients attending a public primary care clinic in Selangor. The DMOQ English version underwent adaptation, translation, face validation and field testing to produce the Malay version. Psychometric analysis was performed using Exploratory Factor Analysis, internal consistency and testretest reliability. RESULTS: The DMOQ domains were conceptually equivalent between English and Malay language. A total of 13 items and two domains were removed during the validation process (three items during the content validation, three items due to poor factor loadings, five items as they loaded onto two domains which were not interpretable, one item as it did not fit conceptually into the factor it loaded onto and one openended question as it did not fit into the retained domains). Therefore, the final DMOQ Malay version consisted of 21- items within five domains. The Cronbach alpha was 0.714 and the intraclass-correlation coefficient was 0.868. CONCLUSION: The DMOQ Malay version is a valid and reliable tool which is consistent over time. It can be used to examine the perception of T2DM patients towards the risk of their offspring developing diabetes and possibility of intervention in Malay-speaking patients.

Peer support for patients with type 2 diabetes: cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of peer support for patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled. SETTING: 20 general practices in the east of the Republic of Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: 395 patients (192 in intervention group, 203 in control group) and 29 peer supporters with type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTION: All practices introduced a standardised diabetes care system. The peer support intervention ran over a two year period and contained four elements: the recruitment and training of peer supporters, nine group meetings led by peer supporters in participant's own general practice, and a retention plan for the peer supporters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: HbA(1c); cholesterol concentration; systolic blood pressure; and wellbeing score. RESULTS: There was no difference between intervention and control patients at baseline. All practices and 85% (337) of patients were followed up. At two year follow-up, there were no significant differences in HbA(1c) (mean difference -0.08%, 95% confidence interval -0.35% to 0.18%), systolic blood pressure (-3.9 mm Hg, -8.9 to 1.1 mm Hg), total cholesterol concentration (-0.03 mmol/L, -0.28 to 0.22 mmol/L), or wellbeing scores (-0.7, -2.3 to 0.8). While there was a trend towards decreases in the proportion of patients with poorly controlled risk factors at follow-up, particularly for systolic blood pressure (52% (87/166) >130 mm Hg in intervention v 61% (103/169) >130 mm Hg in control), these changes were not significant. The process evaluation indicated that the intervention was generally delivered as intended, though 18% (35) of patients in the intervention group never attended any group meetings. CONCLUSIONS: A group based peer support intervention is feasible in general practice settings, but the intervention was not effective when targeted at all patients with type 2 diabetes. While there was a trend towards improvements of clinical outcomes, the results do not support the widespread adoption of peer support. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42541690.

What has happened to people affected by thalidomide 50 years on?

INTRODUCTION: There have been reports of thalidomide-affected people suffering a deterioration in their disability over time [1, 2]. This study assessed changes in disabilities among thalidomide-affected people in the Irish population. METHODS: A questionnaire, assessing musculo-skeletal health, quality-of-life, general health and illness intrusiveness was sent to 26 people affected by thalidomide in the Republic of Ireland. RESULTS: Seventeen (65%) responded. Six (35%) respondents were not working as a result of their disability. Eleven (65%) reported a worsening of their disability over time, with nine of them reporting the deterioration as moderate to severe. The impact of this decline was measured by respondents in terms of ability to perform daily tasks, emotional health and finances (due to extra costs related to clothing, transport, housing alterations and heating). CONCLUSION: There is a need to continually review the physical, psychological and social needs of thalidomide survivors in order to ensure optimum care is made available.

'Breaking up is hard to do': perspectives of general practitioners and patients towards removals from GP lists.

BACKGROUND: The numbers of removals of patients from General Practitioner lists in Ireland is increasing and is a cause for some concern. AIMS: To examine the views of both general practitioners and patients toward removals of patients from general practitioner lists. METHODS: Questionnaire survey to general practitioners in North Inner City Dublin who had removed patients from their list over a 1-year period (n = 45) and to the patients they had removed (n = 86). Follow up semi structured interviews were carried out with five general practitioners and ten patients. RESULTS: For doctors, the decision to remove a problematic patient from their list is generally a positive experience, providing relief and being associated with certainty in both the decision and the process. For the patient, being removed from a GP's list is a negative experience, stressful and confusing. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for the development of a clear responsive, transparent and supportive system for removing patients from a GP list.

Consensus on diabetes management in primary care.

Diabetes management in Irish Primary Care is in the early stages of development. This study used a Delphi technique with a panel of experts working in diabetes in primary care in order to reach a consensus on its future development. There was strong agreement on the need for multidisciplinary professional advocacy to improve services for people with diabetes. The panel indicated a preference for the development of shared models of care and emphasised the importance of research, audit and professional education. The results of this study can be used by health planners to develop services in a way that reflects the experience and opinion of those working as experts in the field of primary care diabetes.

Structuring diabetes care in general practices: many improvements, remaining challenges.

BACKGROUND: For people with type 2 diabetes to enjoy improved longevity and quality of life, care needs to be organised in a systematic way. AIM: To test if processes and intermediate outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes changed with the move to structured care in general practice shared with secondary care. METHODS: An audit of process and intermediate outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes before and after the change to structured care in 10 Dublin general practices shared with secondary care four years on. RESULTS: Structured diabetes care in general practice has led to more dedicated clinics improved processes of care and increased access to multidisciplinary expertise. Improvement in blood pressure control, the use of aspirin and the use of lipid lowering agents indicate a significant decrease in absolute risk of vascular events for this population. CONCLUSIONS: Structured care in general practice improves intermediate outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes. Further improvements need to be made to reach international targets.

Sustainability and effectiveness of comprehensive diabetes care to a district population.

AIMS: To evaluate whether diabetes care in a district population can be sustained over time and intensive management of multiple risk factors can be achieved against a background of rising prevalence of known diabetes and shift of responsibility towards primary care. METHODS: Assessment of process and outcome measures achieved by a comprehensive diabetes service. Routine data were collected from patients registered with diabetes in a district population by repeated cross-sectional survey in 1991 (n = 2284 patients) and 2001 (n = 5809 patients). RESULTS: Between 1991 and 2001 the recording of body mass index (76.8 vs. 71.3%, P = 0.01) and HbA(1c) measurement (92.2 vs. 86.4%, P < 0.001) decreased, whereas recording of smoking status (72.4 vs. 82%, P < 0.001), cholesterol level (54.7 vs. 82.5%, P < 0.001) and eye screening result (86.1 vs. 91.3%, P < 0.001) improved. Surviving patients with Type 2 diabetes had significant improvements in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and cholesterol, significant deterioration in HbA(1c) and creatinine, and no change in body mass index. Changes in blood pressure and HbA(1c) over time were similar to those reported in the UKPDS. CONCLUSIONS: The delivery of processes and outcomes of care to a district population can be sustained at a high level over a 10-year period within a comprehensive diabetes service. We would suggest that a multifaceted complex intervention is required to achieve these results.

Changes in prevalence and site of care of diabetes in a health district 1991-2001.

AIMS: Alongside a rising prevalence of known diabetes, patterns of care for diabetes have been changing in the United Kingdom. The aim of this study is to describe the changes in the prevalence of known diabetes and shift in site of care of patients in a single health district over a 10-year period. METHODS: Repeat cross-sectional study over 10 years of patients with diabetes resident in North Tyneside district. RESULTS: The crude prevalence of known diabetes in North Tyneside rose from 1.1 to 3.0% between 1991 and 2001. The proportion of patients receiving their diabetes care wholly in primary care rose significantly from 608/2236 (27%) in 1991 to 3995/5809 (69%) in 2001 (chi(2) = 968, 1 d.f., P < 0.001). The number of patients attending secondary care also rose by 14% over this period of time from 1508 to 1712 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the extra workload of the rising prevalence of diabetes has been met in primary care. However, hospital care has not seen a drop in workload. This has important implications for health care planning, as an increase in resources will be required within both primary and secondary care to meet the needs of the diabetic population.

Screening for Type 2 diabetes: is it worthwhile? Views of general practitioners and practice nurses.

AIMS: Screening for Type 2 diabetes does not meet all the criteria for screening, yet is increasingly proposed. The views of health care professionals towards screening for Type 2 diabetes are not known. We set out to explore the attitudes and beliefs held by general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses towards screening for Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with 10 GPs and nine practice nurses in eight general practices in North-east England. Data collection and analysis proceeded in an iterative manner in accordance with grounded theory. RESULTS: Practitioners who perceive themselves to be most aware of the evidence base surrounding screening for Type 2 diabetes are least likely to support its introduction. Those who support screening for Type 2 diabetes hold a 'common sense' viewpoint that earlier detection must be better and believe that patients demand and respect early diagnosis. Practitioners acknowledge a lack of knowledge and skills to promote lifestyle changes. This deficiency is combined with workload issues, contributing towards a medicalized view of diabetes screening. CONCLUSIONS: The belief that screening for Type 2 diabetes is worthwhile is based not on evidence for the effectiveness of screening, but rather on a complex interaction of factors including perceptions of patient desires and an interplay of previous experience and evidence from other sources. Increased resources would be most likely to promote screening in primary care.

Attitudes of patients towards the use of chaperones in primary care.

There exists wide variation in practice regarding the use of chaperones for physical examination of the patient in primary care. Guidelines agree that a chaperone should be offered or used whenever a patient is undergoing an intimate examination. This paper aims to gauge patient views on the use of chaperones in primary care. Focus groups were used to identify themes surrounding the use of chaperones in primary care. Questionnaires were then mailed to 404 women and 400 men aged 16 years to 65 years identified from the lists of three research practices in the Northern and Yorkshire Region. The most important factor for the patient in an intimate examination is the attitude of the doctor; the patient views the offer of a chaperone as a sign of respect by the doctor. The development of shared decision-making within a consultation involving an intimate examination should be seen as more important than a rigid approach towards using a chaperone.

Making research relevant to the primary health care team.

There is, as yet, no strong culture of research in primary care and much of the existing research is conceived and undertaken by people outside primary care. The poor implementation of research findings may, in part, be owing to the fact that those delivering the service are not involved in asking or answering questions that are relevant to their practice. This paper reports how three practices constructed a research agenda based on the unanswered questions of their primary care teams. The research questions prioritised by the teams tended towards patient behaviour and service organisation rather than clinical issues. This contrasts with national research priorities. The process has contributed towards the development of a culture of enquiry among team members. Other primary care teams may benefit from a similar approach. National research priority setting in primary care should take more account of the unanswered questions of primary care teams.

Comprehensive diabetes care in North Tyneside.

The care of a 25% (n = 559) random sample of all patients with diabetes in a district was assessed to determine whether comprehensive diabetes care was being achieved. Process measures initially assessed were repeated 3 years later after several changes in the programme of diabetes care were instituted. The number of patients with diabetes in structured care increased from 91% to 95% between 1991 and 1994, at the same time as an increase in prevalence from 1.2% to 1.8%. There was a shift in the proportion of patients attending primary care from 27% to 40%. There were significant improvements in the delivery of process measures including education. The majority of process measures were delivered to more than 75% of the district diabetes population (for example HbA1c in 93%, fundoscopy in 86%, urine protein in 81%, education on diabetic control in 84%). Comprehensive diabetes care has not yet been fully achieved in North Tyneside district but the programme of care has shown continuous improvement over a 3-year period. Comprehensive diabetes care should be an aim of every district diabetes programme.

Care of malignant disease in an urban practice.

The prevalence, incidence and care of malignant disease in an urban general practice were studied over a one-year period. Prevalence of malignant disease was 13.1 per 1000 patients, with an incidence of 1.9 per 1000 patients per year. The mortality rate over the year was 2.6 per 1000 patients per year.Patients with malignant disease generated twice as many primary care consultations as the average practice patient and home visiting was increased fourfold. This increased visiting was most apparent for terminal-care patients. Nevertheless, the increase in consultations did not fully reflect the amount of time, energy and emotional support given by the primary care team.