Breaking Barriers to Effective Type 2 Diabetes Management: Findings from the Use of the OPTIMA© Questionnaire in Clinical Practice

Overview

Journal Adv Ther

Date 2016 May 20

PMID 27193870

Citations 4

Authors

Andre Grimaldi

Alfred Penfornis

Silla Consoli

Bruno Falissard

Elisabeth Eymard

Paul Williams

Sylvie Dejager

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The OPTIMA© (MSD, Courbevoie, France) questionnaire was developed to promote shared decisions and the set-up of specific micro-objectives in clinical practice by optimizing communication between type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients and their physicians. The present study aimed to assess OPTIMA in clinical practice.

Methods: A cross-sectional multicenter observational study was conducted in France from 2012 to 2014. During routine consultation, patients completed one of the five modules of the OPTIMA questionnaire (Physical activity, Diet, Treatment, Knowledge of the disease or Self-monitoring of blood glucose). The rate of SMART (specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic, timely) micro-objective set-up following the use of the questionnaire was assessed. Data on how patients felt about their diabetes management (beliefs concerning actions, how easy they were to do and how often they were done in practice) were gathered. Finally, patients' and physicians' opinions on OPTIMA were assessed using the PRAgmatic Content and face validity Test (PRAC-Test© (Mapi, Lyon, France) evaluation questionnaire.

Results: Overall, 807 patients were included by 186 physicians. While 92.7 % of consultations led to the set-up of a micro-objective, only 22.3 % were SMART micro-objectives: Physical activity module (34.3 %), Diet module (9.6 %), Treatment module (16.4 %), Knowledge of the disease module (25.2 %), and self-monitoring of blood glucose module (29.5 %). Among patients completing the Physical activity module, 79.0 % reported that they believed physical activity was useful, 35.0 % that it was easy, and 25.8 % that they regularly practised it. PRAC-Test results showed that OPTIMA was a useful and easy-to-use questionnaire that promotes communication between physicians and their patients according to 92.8 % of patients and 69.4 % of physicians.

Conclusion: The OPTIMA questionnaire facilitates communication between patients and their physicians and promotes the set-up of micro-objectives concerning T2DM management. The Physical activity module was the most likely of the five modules in the questionnaire to lead to the set-up of SMART micro-objectives.

Funding: MSD France.

Citing Articles

Correlation of health literacy, health management self-efficacy, and attitude in elderly patients with schizophrenia: A cross-sectional study.

Liao S, Wang L Nurs Open. 2024; 11(1):e2065.

PMID: 38268261 PMC: 10724592. DOI: 10.1002/nop2.2065.

Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review.

Kim E, Nam I, Koo Y Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(15).

PMID: 35954517 PMC: 9367952. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19159163.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Digital Patient-Reported Outcome Tool in Routine Outpatient Diabetes Care: Mixed Methods Formative Pilot Study.

Skovlund S, Troelsen L, Noergaard L, Pietraszek A, Jakobsen P, Ejskjaer N JMIR Form Res. 2021; 5(11):e28329.

PMID: 34730545 PMC: 8600435. DOI: 10.2196/28329.

Can the Routine Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Improve the Delivery of Person-Centered Diabetes Care? A Review of Recent Developments and a Case Study.

Skovlund S, Lichtenberg T, Hessler D, Ejskjaer N Curr Diab Rep. 2019; 19(9):84.

PMID: 31420754 DOI: 10.1007/s11892-019-1190-x.

References

Funnell M, Brown T, Childs B, Haas L, Hosey G, Jensen B . National Standards for diabetes self-management education. Diabetes Care. 2011; 34 Suppl 1:S89-96. PMC: 3006053. DOI: 10.2337/dc11-S089. View

Marsland E, Bowman J . An interactive education session and follow-up support as a strategy to improve clinicians' goal-writing skills: a randomized controlled trial. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010; 16(1):3-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01104.x. View

Duclos M, Dejager S, Postel-Vinay N, di Nicola S, Quere S, Fiquet B . Physical activity in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension--insights into motivations and barriers from the MOBILE study. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2015; 11:361-71. PMC: 4492639. DOI: 10.2147/VHRM.S84832. View

Reach G, Consoli S, Halimi S, Colas C, Duclos M, Fontaine P . The multinational second Diabetes, Attitudes, Wishes and Needs study: results of the French survey. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015; 9:289-97. PMC: 4334344. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S68941. View

Inzucchi S, Bergenstal R, Buse J, Diamant M, Ferrannini E, Nauck M . Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2012; 35(6):1364-79. PMC: 3357214. DOI: 10.2337/dc12-0413. View

Bruckert E, Masana L, Chapman M, Descamps O, Bosi E, Allaert F . Dietary supplementation contributes to lifestyle improvement in hypercholesterolemic patients in real-life contexts. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014; 30(7):1309-16. DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2014.890924. View

Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage M, Tishelman C . A conceptual framework for patient-professional communication: an application to the cancer context. Psychooncology. 2005; 14(10):801-9. DOI: 10.1002/pon.950. View

Adiseshiah M . Effective care of patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia: a nurse's perspective. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2005; 68 Suppl 2:S23-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2005.03.017. View

Blair L, Legare F . Is Shared Decision Making a Utopian Dream or an Achievable Goal?. Patient. 2015; 8(6):471-6. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0117-0. View

10.

Auerbach S, Clore J, Kiesler D, Orr T, Pegg P, Quick B . Relation of diabetic patients' health-related control appraisals and physician-patient interpersonal impacts to patients' metabolic control and satisfaction with treatment. J Behav Med. 2002; 25(1):17-31. DOI: 10.1023/a:1013585617303. View

11.

Nam S, Chesla C, Stotts N, Kroon L, Janson S . Barriers to diabetes management: patient and provider factors. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011; 93(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2011.02.002. View

12.

Cramer J . A systematic review of adherence with medications for diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27(5):1218-24. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1218. View

13.

Revello K, Fields W . An Educational Intervention to Increase Nurse Adherence in Eliciting Patient Daily Goals. Rehabil Nurs. 2015; 40(5):320-6. DOI: 10.1002/rnj.201. View

14.

Hoffmann T, Legare F, Simmons M, McNamara K, McCaffery K, Trevena L . Shared decision making: what do clinicians need to know and why should they bother?. Med J Aust. 2014; 201(1):35-9. DOI: 10.5694/mja14.00002. View

15.

Wermeling M, Thiele-Manjali U, Koschack J, Lucius-Hoene G, Himmel W . Type 2 diabetes patients' perspectives on lifestyle counselling and weight management in general practice: a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2014; 15:97. PMC: 4027991. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-15-97. View

16.

Stacey D, Legare F, Col N, Bennett C, Barry M, Eden K . Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; (1):CD001431. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4. View

17.

Prochaska J, DiClemente C, Norcross J . In search of how people change. Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol. 1992; 47(9):1102-14. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.47.9.1102. View

18.

Abdulhadi N, Al Shafaee M, Freudenthal S, Ostenson C, Wahlstrom R . Patient-provider interaction from the perspectives of type 2 diabetes patients in Muscat, Oman: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007; 7:162. PMC: 2174468. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-162. View