Are There Different Viewpoints About the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Comorbidities? A Multidisciplinary Spanish Qualitative Research

Francesc-Xavier Cos; Ricardo Gómez-Huelgas; Fernando Gomez-Peralta

doi:10.1007/s13300-021-01188-7

Are There Different Viewpoints About the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Comorbidities? A Multidisciplinary Spanish Qualitative Research

Diabetes Ther. 2022 Jan;13(1):189-203. doi: 10.1007/s13300-021-01188-7. Epub 2021 Dec 20.

Authors

Francesc-Xavier Cos¹, Ricardo Gómez-Huelgas², Fernando Gomez-Peralta³

Affiliations

¹ Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria, Fundación Instituto Universitario para la Investigación en Atención Primaria de Salud Jordi Gol i Gurina (IDIAPJGol), Innovation Officer, Institut Català de la Salut., Centro de Atención Primaria Sant Martí de Provençals, Barcelona, Spain.
² Servicio de Medicina Interna, Hospital Regional Universitario, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA), Universidad de Málaga (UMA), Málaga, CIBER Fisiopatología de Obesidad y Nutrición (CIBERobn), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain. ricardogomezhuelgas@hotmail.com.
³ Unidad de Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital General de Segovia, Segovia, Spain.

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to explore the vision of a large multidisciplinary group of physicians treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Spain, with a special focus on controversial management aspects. The perceptions of primary care (PC) physicians and hospital care (HC) specialists were compared.

Methods: This was a mixed survey that included Delphi-like statements and opinion, attitude and behaviour (OAB) questions. The Delphi-like statements were assessed on the basis of the degree of agreement among respondents, and a descriptive analysis was performed on the answers to the OAB questions.

Results: A total of 296 participants responded to the first wave of the survey, of whom 293 responded to the second wave (211 from PC and 80 from HC, with two respondents for whom there were no data on specialty). A high degree of consensus (CNS ≥ 0.8) was obtained in all the statements. A proactive approach to detect prediabetes or T2DM in asymptomatic people was highly supported (80.4% of agreement). Introducing early treatment intensification was considered to favour the durability of glycaemic control and to delay the progression of the disease (80.4%). There was agreement on the statement that glycaemic variability constitutes a risk factor for chronic complications, although differences in the perceptions of HC physicians and PC specialists were identified (86.3 vs. 80.1%, respectively). More HC physicans than PC specialists considered comorbidities to affect the ability to self-care (95 vs. 82.9%, respectively).

Conclusions: The survey revealed that there was a high, albeit not universal, degree of agreement amongst PC physicians and HC specialists in relation to prevention, screening and diagnosis of T2DM; early treatment intensification; dysglycaemias; and the management of patients with comorbidities. The statement on the management of patients with comorbidities elicited the highest difference between PC physicans and HC specialists. The results of this survey indicate that there is room for improvement in terms of implementing strategies in these areas.

Keywords: Antidiabetic agents; Clinical guidelines; Comorbidities; Diabetes Mellitus, type 2; Drug therapy, combination; Prediabetes; Primary care; Qualitative research.