» Articles » PMID: 29991281

Using Cluster Analysis to Understand Clinician Readiness to Promote Continuous Glucose Monitoring Adoption

Overview
Specialty Endocrinology
Date 2018 Jul 12
PMID 29991281
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Many people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) report barriers to using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Diabetes care providers may have their own barriers to promoting CGM uptake. The goal of this study was to develop clinician "personas" with regard to readiness to promote CGM uptake.

Methods: Diabetes care providers who treat people with T1D (N = 209) completed a survey on perceived patient barriers to device uptake, technology attitudes, and characteristics and barriers specific to their clinical practice. K-means cluster analyses grouped the sample by CGM barriers and attitudes. ANOVAs and chi-square tests assessed group differences on provider and patient characteristics. The authors assigned descriptive names for each persona.

Results: Analyses yielded three clinician personas regarding readiness to promote CGM uptake. Ready clinicians (20% of sample; 24% physicians, 38% certified diabetes educators/CDEs) had positive technology attitudes, had clinic time to work with patients using CGM, and found it easy to keep up with technology advances. In comparison, Cautious clinicians (41% of sample; 17% physicians, 53% CDEs) perceived that their patients had many barriers to adopting CGM and had less time than the Ready group to work with patients using CGM data. Not Yet Ready clinicians (40% of sample; 9% physicians; 79% CDEs) had negative technology attitudes and the least clinic time to work with CGM data. They found it difficult to keep up with technology advances.

Conclusion: Some diabetes clinicians may benefit from tailored interventions and additional time and resources to empower them to help facilitate increased uptake of CGM technology.

Citing Articles

Determinants of implementation of continuous glucose monitoring for patients with Insulin-Treated type 2 diabetes: a national survey of primary care providers.

Vimalananda V, Kragen B, Leibowitz A, Qian S, Wormwood J, Linsky A BMC Prim Care. 2025; 26(1):68.

PMID: 40057678 PMC: 11889852. DOI: 10.1186/s12875-025-02764-7.


A Qualitative Study of Older Adult Perspectives on Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 2 Diabetes.

Tanenbaum M, Peterson I, Uratsu C, Chen M, Gilliam L, Karter A J Gen Intern Med. 2025; .

PMID: 40038224 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-025-09458-x.


Augmenting clinicians' analytical workflow through task-based integration of data visualizations and algorithmic insights: a user-centered design study.

Scholich T, Raj S, Lee J, Newman M J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024; 31(11):2455-2473.

PMID: 39003519 PMC: 11491654. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocae183.


Unveiling the interplay between rational, psychological and functional factors in continuous glucose monitoring early adoption: Novel evidence from the Dexcom ONE case in Italy.

Zoccarato F, Manzoni M, Minotti D, Lettieri E, Boaretto A BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):747.

PMID: 38890619 PMC: 11186290. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11195-6.


Safety and Feasibility Evaluation of Automated User Profile Settings Initialization and Adaptation With Control-IQ Technology.

Shah V, Akturk H, Trahan A, Piquette N, Wheatcroft A, Schertz E J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024; 18(6):1281-1287.

PMID: 38323362 PMC: 11535304. DOI: 10.1177/19322968241229074.


References
1.
Dehon E, Weiss N, Jones J, Faulconer W, Hinton E, Sterling S . A Systematic Review of the Impact of Physician Implicit Racial Bias on Clinical Decision Making. Acad Emerg Med. 2017; 24(8):895-904. DOI: 10.1111/acem.13214. View

2.
Miller K, Foster N, Beck R, Bergenstal R, DuBose S, DiMeglio L . Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U.S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015; 38(6):971-8. DOI: 10.2337/dc15-0078. View

3.
Russell S . Progress of artificial pancreas devices towards clinical use: the first outpatient studies. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2015; 22(2):106-11. PMC: 4383642. DOI: 10.1097/MED.0000000000000142. View

4.
Rubin R, Peyrot M . Factors associated with physician perceptions of and willingness to recommend inhaled insulin. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010; 27(2):285-94. DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2010.541434. View

5.
Tamborlane W, Beck R, Bode B, Buckingham B, Peter Chase H, Clemons R . Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359(14):1464-76. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805017. View