Postgraduate doctors in training's limited knowledge and practice in the assessment and management of inpatients with diabetes and frailty may contribute to suboptimal outcomes.

IF 0.9 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Hnin Lwin, Anu Thomas, Mohamed Fazil, Kevin Thottungal, Garima Gupta, Kashish Gera, Ali Kareem, Sadaf Saeed, Meri Davitadze, Eka Melson, Alison Gallagher, Kath Higgins
{"title":"Postgraduate doctors in training's limited knowledge and practice in the assessment and management of inpatients with diabetes and frailty may contribute to suboptimal outcomes.","authors":"Hnin Lwin, Anu Thomas, Mohamed Fazil, Kevin Thottungal, Garima Gupta, Kashish Gera, Ali Kareem, Sadaf Saeed, Meri Davitadze, Eka Melson, Alison Gallagher, Kath Higgins","doi":"10.1177/14782715251362057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>People with diabetes and frailty require less intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia. Previous study has shown low rates of HbA<sub>1c</sub> assessment and deintensification for people with diabetes and frailty. Postgraduate doctors in training (PGDiT) is important in the inpatient management of people with diabetes and frailty. This study aims to assess the knowledge and management practice amongst PGDiT in managing people with diabetes and frailty and how this may translate to patients' clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three cross-sectional survey-based studies were conducted on PGDiT at the beginning of each 4-month rotation. Survey questions incorporated knowledge of HbA<sub>1c</sub> goals and on PGDiT deintensification practice in people with diabetes and frailty who are overtreated with blood glucose-lowering medication. These were coupled by two cross-sectional data collection on patients' outcomes conducted during the same period including HbA<sub>1c</sub> assessment and rates of deintensification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PGDiT survey: 160 PGDiT responded to the survey. 80.0% (<i>n</i> = 128/160) of PGDiT reported that they knew the target HbA<sub>1c</sub> in patients with diabetes and frailty. However, only 32.8% (<i>n</i> = 42/128) of these correctly indicated the target HbA<sub>1c</sub> for such patients. PGDiT deintensification practices were lower than expected and several barriers of inpatient deintensification were identified. Patients' clinical outcomes: 198 patients with diabetes and moderate-severe frailty were included in our analysis (median (interquartile range, IQR) age 80 (71-87) years with median (IQR) clinical frailty scale of 6 (6-7)). For patients who did not have their HbA<sub>1c</sub> assessed in the last 6 months preceding admission, only 18.1% (<i>n</i> = 13/72) had it assessed during admission. In patients who are overtreated, deintensification rate was 29.7% (<i>n</i> = 22/74).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our audit shows limited knowledge and management practices amongst PGDiT in the management of inpatients with diabetes and frailty that may contribute to low inpatient deintensification rate. Interventions are needed to improve patient outcomes and a model of care consisting of appropriate inpatient multidisciplinary team input to reduce treatment inertia.</p>","PeriodicalId":46606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh","volume":" ","pages":"174-183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782715251362057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: People with diabetes and frailty require less intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia. Previous study has shown low rates of HbA1c assessment and deintensification for people with diabetes and frailty. Postgraduate doctors in training (PGDiT) is important in the inpatient management of people with diabetes and frailty. This study aims to assess the knowledge and management practice amongst PGDiT in managing people with diabetes and frailty and how this may translate to patients' clinical outcomes.

Methods: Three cross-sectional survey-based studies were conducted on PGDiT at the beginning of each 4-month rotation. Survey questions incorporated knowledge of HbA1c goals and on PGDiT deintensification practice in people with diabetes and frailty who are overtreated with blood glucose-lowering medication. These were coupled by two cross-sectional data collection on patients' outcomes conducted during the same period including HbA1c assessment and rates of deintensification.

Results: PGDiT survey: 160 PGDiT responded to the survey. 80.0% (n = 128/160) of PGDiT reported that they knew the target HbA1c in patients with diabetes and frailty. However, only 32.8% (n = 42/128) of these correctly indicated the target HbA1c for such patients. PGDiT deintensification practices were lower than expected and several barriers of inpatient deintensification were identified. Patients' clinical outcomes: 198 patients with diabetes and moderate-severe frailty were included in our analysis (median (interquartile range, IQR) age 80 (71-87) years with median (IQR) clinical frailty scale of 6 (6-7)). For patients who did not have their HbA1c assessed in the last 6 months preceding admission, only 18.1% (n = 13/72) had it assessed during admission. In patients who are overtreated, deintensification rate was 29.7% (n = 22/74).

Conclusion: Our audit shows limited knowledge and management practices amongst PGDiT in the management of inpatients with diabetes and frailty that may contribute to low inpatient deintensification rate. Interventions are needed to improve patient outcomes and a model of care consisting of appropriate inpatient multidisciplinary team input to reduce treatment inertia.

在培训中的研究生医生在评估和管理住院糖尿病和虚弱患者方面的知识和实践有限,可能导致不理想的结果。
简介:糖尿病和虚弱的人需要较少的强化治疗高血糖。先前的研究表明,糖尿病和体弱多病患者的HbA1c评估和去强化率较低。在训博士研究生(PGDiT)在糖尿病和虚弱患者的住院管理中具有重要意义。本研究旨在评估PGDiT在管理糖尿病和虚弱患者方面的知识和管理实践,以及如何将其转化为患者的临床结果。方法:在每4个月轮换开始时,对PGDiT进行3项基于横断面调查的研究。调查问题包括对糖化血红蛋白目标的了解,以及过度使用降血糖药物治疗的糖尿病和虚弱患者的PGDiT去强化实践。这些数据与同期患者结果的两个横断面数据收集相结合,包括HbA1c评估和去强化率。结果:PGDiT调查:160名PGDiT回复了调查。80.0% (n = 128/160)的PGDiT报告他们知道糖尿病和虚弱患者的目标HbA1c。然而,其中只有32.8% (n = 42/128)正确指示了这类患者的目标HbA1c。PGDiT去强化实践低于预期,并确定了住院患者去强化的几个障碍。患者临床结局:198例糖尿病合并中重度虚弱患者纳入我们的分析(中位年龄为80(71-87)岁,中位(IQR)临床虚弱量表为6(6-7))。对于入院前6个月内未进行HbA1c评估的患者,只有18.1% (n = 13/72)在入院时进行了评估。过度治疗的患者去强化率为29.7% (n = 22/74)。结论:我们的审计显示,PGDiT在管理住院糖尿病和虚弱患者方面的知识和管理实践有限,这可能是住院患者去强化率低的原因。需要采取干预措施来改善患者的预后,并建立一种由适当的住院多学科团队投入组成的护理模式,以减少治疗惰性。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (JRCPE) is the College’s quarterly, peer-reviewed journal, with an international circulation of 8,000. It has three main emphases – clinical medicine, education and medical history. The online JRCPE provides full access to the contents of the print journal and has a number of additional features including advance online publication of recently accepted papers, an online archive, online-only papers, online symposia abstracts, and a series of topic-specific supplements, primarily based on the College’s consensus conferences.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信