What do patients with diabetes want from their GP?

  • Br J Gen Pract

  • from Dawn O'Shea
  • Clinical Summaries
Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals. Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals.

Takeaway

  • Patients with diabetes say face-to-face contact with healthcare professionals, length of consultation time, and continuity of care are important aspects of patient-practitioner interactions.
  • Preferences were met less over time as diabetes duration increased.

Why this matters

  • An estimated 4 million people in the United Kingdom have type 2 diabetes, and a further 500,000 are undiagnosed.
  • Previous evidence suggests better patient experiences with practitioners are associated with lower cardiovascular risk factors which, in turn, could lead to a delay in diabetes progression.
  • This study shows that the aspects of care that are valued by patients are increasingly under threat in UK primary care.

Key results

  • Early in the course of their disease, comments on the frequency of face-to-face interactions with healthcare professionals were largely positive.
  • At 10-year follow-up, a large number of participants had not experienced any recent patient-practitioner interactions, and some reported no face-to-face contact with a practitioner over time periods ranging from 10 months to 5 years.
  • Over 10 years, participants made frequent references to inadequate time being available during interactions with practitioners.
  • Participants seemed to place great importance on relational continuity of care than face-to-face contact.
  • Patient preferences were met less over time as diabetes duration increased.

Study design

  • Longitudinal qualitative analysis over 10 years in UK primary care using data from the ADDITION-Cambridge and ADDITION-Plus trials from 2002 to 2016.
  • Funding: Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Diabetes UK, NHS, National Institute for Health Research.

Limitations

  • Response rates were low at both sampling points.
  • Trial setting and intervention could have influenced patients’ perceptions of care.