Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 9

Patient-reported outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus: patients’ and primary care physicians’ perspectives in the Spanish health care system

Authors Franch-Nadal J, Labrador Barba E, Gómez-García MC, Buil-Cosiales P, Millaruelo JM, Orera Peña ML

Received 20 April 2015

Accepted for publication 3 July 2015

Published 8 October 2015 Volume 2015:9 Pages 1413—1422

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S87005

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Qian Ding

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen

Josep Franch-Nadal,1,2 Elena Labrador Barba,3 M Carmen Gómez-García,4 Pilar Buil-Cosiales,5 José Manuel Millaruelo,6 María Luisa Orera Peña3

1AEP Raval Sud, Barcelona, 2Center for Biomedical Research Network of Diabetes and Associated Metabolic Diseases (CIBERDEM), Madrid, 3Established Pharmaceuticals Division, Mylan EPD, Madrid, 4Centro de Salud Velez Norte, Málaga, 5Centro de Salud Azpilagana, Pamplona, 6Centro de Salud Torrero La Paz, Zaragoza, Spain

Objective: Understanding patients’ and physicians’ perceptions of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management and treatment has important implications for diabetes care, allowing the identification of clinical practice issues that could be improved, leading to patients’ better understanding of the illness and, consequently, healthier self-management behaviors. The objective of this study was to identify differences between physicians’ and T2DM patients’ perceptions related to health status, patient-reported outcomes assessments, and T2DM management and treatment, in routine clinical practice in Spain.
Methods: This was an observational, cross-sectional study including 1,012 T2DM patients and 974 physicians from 47 and 52 Spanish provinces, respectively. An electronic structured self-administered questionnaire containing 17 questions was designed aiming to address both physicians’ and patient’s perceptions on overall T2DM health status and patient-reported outcomes.
Results: T2DM patients perceived a worse health status (40% reported having a “good” and 38% a “neither good nor bad” health status) compared with physicians’ perceptions (77% thought patients had a “good” health status). Most patients answered being “satisfied” or “neither satisfied nor unsatisfied” with the given information, while physicians considered that patients were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the information for self-monitoring blood glucose and treatment administration. Fifty-seven percent of patients reported that medical recommendations were “important”, while 58% of physicians considered it as “very important”. Fifty-three percent of patients perceived that their current T2DM treatment suited their preferences “quite a lot”, and this was lower than the proportion of physicians (69%) that believed this for their patients. Additionally, a lower percentage of patients (53%) than physicians (79%) believed that their treatment improved their health-related quality of life “quite a lot”. All differences between patients and physicians were statistically significant (P<0.001).
Conclusion: Patients and physicians demonstrate different views concerning all questions related to T2DM health status and diabetes management and treatment (information, recommendations, satisfaction, and preferences).

Keywords: T2DM, PROs, health-related quality of life, HRQoL, preferences, adherence, treatment satisfaction, perception

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Readers of this article also read:

Pharmacologic rationale underlying the therapeutic effects of tiotropium/olodaterol in COPD

Pelaia G, Vatrella A, Busceti MT, Gallelli L, Calabrese C, Terracciano R, Lombardo N, Maselli R

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:1563-1572

Published Date: 8 October 2015

Prognostic nutritional index before adjuvant chemotherapy predicts chemotherapy compliance and survival among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer

Shimizu K, Okita R, Saisho S, Yukawa T, Maeda A, Nojima Y, Nakata M

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:1555-1561

Published Date: 8 October 2015

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010