Dataset Information

The experiences of Chinese general practitioners in communicating with people with type 2 diabetes-a focus group study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

China has more ascertained cases of diabetes than any other country. Much of the care of people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in China is managed by GPs and this will increase with the implementation of health care reforms aimed at strengthening China's primary health care system. Diabetes care requires effective communication between physicians and patients, yet little is known about this area in China. We aimed to explore the experiences of Chinese GPs in communicating with diabetes patients and how this may relate to communication skills training.

Methods

Focus groups with Chinese GPs were undertaken. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 15 GPs from Guangzhou city in China. All data were audio-recorded and transcribed. A thematic analysis using the Framework Method was applied to code the data and identify themes.

Results

Seven males and 8 females from 12 general practices attended 4 focus groups with a mean age of 37.6 years and 7.5 years' work experience. Four major themes were identified: diversity in diabetic patients, communication with patients, patient-doctor relationship, and communication skills training. GPs reported facing a wide variety of diabetes patients in their daily practice. They believed insufficient knowledge and misunderstanding of diabetes was common among patients. They highlighted several challenges in communicating with diabetes patients, such as insufficient consultation time, poor communication regarding blood glucose monitoring and misunderstanding the risk of complications. They used terms such as "blind spot" or "not on the same channel" to describe gaps in their patients' understanding of diabetes and its management, and cited this as a cause of ineffective patient-doctor communication. Mutual understanding of diabetes was perceived to be an important factor towards building positive patient-doctor relationships. Although GPs believed communication skills training was necessary, they reported rarely received this.

Conclusions

Chinese GPs reported facing challenges in communicating with diabetes patients. Some of these were perceived as being due to the patients themselves, others were attributed to system constraints, and some were seen as related to a lack of clinician training. The study identified key issues for the development of primary care-based management of diabetes in China, and for developing appropriate communication skills training programs for the primary care workforce.

SUBMITTER: Yao M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8287665 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWith the implementation of health care reforms in China, primary care is on a journey to provide care for most patients with type 2 diabetes. While Chinese general practitioners (GPs) have described challenges in communication with diabetes patients in their daily practice, little is known about patients' experiences in communicating with their GPs.MethodsFive focus groups (of 4-5 participants each) were used to explore views from patients with type 2 diabetes. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a spread of participants from general practices in Guangzhou city, China. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using the Framework Method.ResultsTen males and 12 female patients from five general practices participated in focus group discussions, with a mean age of 57.3 years and 7.3 years of diabetes duration. Five main themes emerged: patients' understanding about diabetes, diabetes medication, communication with GPs, physician-patient relationships, and healthcare systems and context. Patients generally searched for information on the internet, but they weren't always sure if it was trustworthy. Several communication needs were described by diabetes patients, such as explanation of blood glucose monitoring, medication information support, communication in the risk of diabetes complications and cardiovascular disease, and language barriers. Communication was frequently brief and not tailored to their concerns, and some described being scolded or panicked by GPs. Participants acknowledged the pressures within the health system, such as short consultation times, an incoherent GP-hospital interface and high demand.ConclusionsKey issues from the patients' perspective for the development of primary care based management of diabetes in China were identified. People with type 2 diabetes require more access to trustworthy diabetes information and wish for better channels of communication with their GPs. Strategies may be required to improve GPs' communication skills with their patients that also consider the context of the wider health system environment in China.

Project description:BackgroundMedically unexplained symptoms (MUS) and somatoform disorders are common in general practices, but there is evidence that general practitioners (GPs) rarely use these codes. Assuming that correct classification and coding of symptoms and diseases are important for adequate management and treatment, insights into these processes could reveal problematic areas and possible solutions. Our study aims at exploring general practitioners' views on coding and reasons for not coding MUS/somatoform disorders.MethodsWe invited GPs to participate in six focus groups (N = 42). Patient vignettes and a semi-structured guideline were used by two moderators to facilitate the discussions. Recordings were transcribed verbatim. Two researchers analyzed the data using structuring content analysis with deductive and inductive category building.ResultsThree main categories turned out to be most relevant. For category a) "benefits of coding" GPs described that coding is seen as being done for reimbursement purposes and is not necessarily linked to the content of their reference files for a specific patient. Others reported to code specific diagnoses only if longer consultations to explore psychosomatic symptoms or psychotherapy are intended to be billed. Reasons for b) "restrained coding" were attempting to protect the patient from stigma through certain diagnoses and the preference for tentative diagnoses and functional coding. Some GPs admitted to c) "code inaccurately" attributing this to insufficient knowledge of ICD-10-criteria, time constraints or using "rules of thumb" for coding.ConclusionsThere seem to be challenges in the process of coding of MUS and somatoform disorders, but GPs appear not to contest the patients' suffering and accept uncertainty (about diagnoses) as an elementary part of their work. From GPs' points of view ICD-10-coding does not appear to be a necessary requirement for treating patients and coding might be avoided to protect the patients from stigma and other negative consequences. Our findings supply a possible explanation for the commonly seen difference between routine and epidemiological data. The recent developments in the DSM-5 and the upcoming ICD-11 will supposedly change acceptance and handling of these diagnoses for GPs and patients. Either way, consequences for GPs' diagnosing and coding behavior are not yet foreseeable.