Discordance Between Clinician and Person-With-Diabetes Perceptions Regarding Technology Barriers and Benefits.

IF 4.1 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Ananta Addala, Kelsey R Howard, Yasaman Hosseinipour, Laya Ekhlaspour
{"title":"Discordance Between Clinician and Person-With-Diabetes Perceptions Regarding Technology Barriers and Benefits.","authors":"Ananta Addala, Kelsey R Howard, Yasaman Hosseinipour, Laya Ekhlaspour","doi":"10.1177/19322968241285045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The quality of clinician-patient relationship is integral to patient health and well-being. This article is a narrative review of published literature on concordance between clinician and patient perspectives on barriers to diabetes technology use. The goals of this manuscript were to review published literature on concordance and to provide practical recommendations for clinicians and researchers. In this review, we discuss the qualitative and quantitative methods that can be applied to measure clinician and patient concordance. There is variability in how concordance is defined, with some studies using questionnaires related to working alliance, while others use a dichotomous variable. We also explore the impact of concordance and discordance on diabetes care, barriers to technology adoption, and disparities in technology use. Published literature has emphasized that physicians may not be aware of their patients' perspectives and values. Discordance between clinicians and patients can be a barrier to diabetes management and technology use. Future directions for research in diabetes technology including strategies for recruiting and retaining representative samples, are discussed. Recommendations are given for clinical care, including shared decision-making frameworks, establishing social support groups optimizing clinician-patient communication, and using patient-reported outcomes to measure patient perspectives on outcomes of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241285045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The quality of clinician-patient relationship is integral to patient health and well-being. This article is a narrative review of published literature on concordance between clinician and patient perspectives on barriers to diabetes technology use. The goals of this manuscript were to review published literature on concordance and to provide practical recommendations for clinicians and researchers. In this review, we discuss the qualitative and quantitative methods that can be applied to measure clinician and patient concordance. There is variability in how concordance is defined, with some studies using questionnaires related to working alliance, while others use a dichotomous variable. We also explore the impact of concordance and discordance on diabetes care, barriers to technology adoption, and disparities in technology use. Published literature has emphasized that physicians may not be aware of their patients' perspectives and values. Discordance between clinicians and patients can be a barrier to diabetes management and technology use. Future directions for research in diabetes technology including strategies for recruiting and retaining representative samples, are discussed. Recommendations are given for clinical care, including shared decision-making frameworks, establishing social support groups optimizing clinician-patient communication, and using patient-reported outcomes to measure patient perspectives on outcomes of interest.

医生和糖尿病患者对技术障碍和益处的看法不一致。
临床医生与患者关系的质量对患者的健康和福祉至关重要。本文对已发表的关于临床医生和患者对糖尿病技术使用障碍的看法是否一致的文献进行了叙述性综述。本稿件旨在回顾已发表的有关一致性的文献,并为临床医生和研究人员提供实用建议。在这篇综述中,我们讨论了可用于衡量临床医生和患者一致性的定性和定量方法。在如何定义一致性方面存在差异,一些研究使用了与工作联盟相关的问卷,而另一些研究则使用了二分变量。我们还探讨了一致性和不一致性对糖尿病护理的影响、采用技术的障碍以及技术使用方面的差异。已发表的文献强调,医生可能并不了解患者的观点和价值观。临床医生和患者之间的不一致可能会成为糖尿病管理和技术使用的障碍。本文讨论了糖尿病技术研究的未来方向,包括招募和保留代表性样本的策略。对临床护理提出了建议,包括共同决策框架、建立社会支持小组以优化临床医生与患者之间的沟通,以及使用患者报告的结果来衡量患者对相关结果的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology Medicine-Internal Medicine
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
12.00%
发文量
148
期刊介绍: The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信