The DePICtion study: Implementing a diabetes classification tool in UK primary care-A qualitative study with primary care staff and patients.

IF 3.4
Charlotte Lee, Maddy Geen, Clare Timblin, Anita Hill, Katherine Young, Robin Humphreys, Angus Jones, Maggie Shepherd, Andrew T Hattersley, Nadeem Qureshi, Beverley M Shields, Katrina Turner
{"title":"The DePICtion study: Implementing a diabetes classification tool in UK primary care-A qualitative study with primary care staff and patients.","authors":"Charlotte Lee, Maddy Geen, Clare Timblin, Anita Hill, Katherine Young, Robin Humphreys, Angus Jones, Maggie Shepherd, Andrew T Hattersley, Nadeem Qureshi, Beverley M Shields, Katrina Turner","doi":"10.1111/dme.70493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The correct classification of diabetes (type 1, type 2 or rarer genetic forms) is essential for optimal treatment, but misclassification is common. The Diabetes in Primary Care Improving Classification (DePICtion) tool uses routinely collected clinical data to flag patients at risk of misclassification and prioritise them for further diagnostic testing.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore the acceptability and implementation of the DePICtion tool in primary care.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>A qualitative study in 11 general practices across the Southwest and East Midlands, UK.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Twelve practices were recruited to the study; 11 practices ran the tool and reviewed flagged patients. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 staff and 11 patients to explore their experiences of the tool, reactions to the results and barriers and facilitators to use. Data were analysed thematically in NVivo.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Staff found the tool straightforward, compatible with existing workflows and clinically useful. Implementation required time and ownership of the process. Patients' responses were shaped by trust in staff and the personal meaning of their diabetes: Some viewed reclassification as a threat to their diagnostic identity, while others welcomed further diagnostic testing. Data privacy concerns were minimal but competing demands on staff time and resources were ubiquitously reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The DePICtion tool is acceptable and clinically useful for improving diabetes classification in primary care. Routine implementation is technically feasible but will require protected time, clear pathways for follow-up and support for patient communication and engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":520603,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","volume":" ","pages":"e70493"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The correct classification of diabetes (type 1, type 2 or rarer genetic forms) is essential for optimal treatment, but misclassification is common. The Diabetes in Primary Care Improving Classification (DePICtion) tool uses routinely collected clinical data to flag patients at risk of misclassification and prioritise them for further diagnostic testing.

Aim: To explore the acceptability and implementation of the DePICtion tool in primary care.

Design and setting: A qualitative study in 11 general practices across the Southwest and East Midlands, UK.

Method: Twelve practices were recruited to the study; 11 practices ran the tool and reviewed flagged patients. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 staff and 11 patients to explore their experiences of the tool, reactions to the results and barriers and facilitators to use. Data were analysed thematically in NVivo.

Results: Staff found the tool straightforward, compatible with existing workflows and clinically useful. Implementation required time and ownership of the process. Patients' responses were shaped by trust in staff and the personal meaning of their diabetes: Some viewed reclassification as a threat to their diagnostic identity, while others welcomed further diagnostic testing. Data privacy concerns were minimal but competing demands on staff time and resources were ubiquitously reported.

Conclusion: The DePICtion tool is acceptable and clinically useful for improving diabetes classification in primary care. Routine implementation is technically feasible but will require protected time, clear pathways for follow-up and support for patient communication and engagement.

描述研究:在英国初级保健中实施糖尿病分类工具-对初级保健工作人员和患者的定性研究。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书