|
Winners of the 2001 DESG Awards |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 Best abstract on Therapeutic Patient Education presented during the 37th EASD Congress, Glasgow, 2001:
Trento M, Bajardi M, Passera P, Maurino M, Carbonari S, Di Miceli S, Cenci A, Gibbins R1, Owens DR1, Cavallo F2, Porta M: Perception of Retinopathy and Screening Procedures among Diabetic People (Abstract No 965)
Diabetic Retinopathy Centre, Dept. of Internal Medicine, University of Turin, Italy, and 1 Bro Taf Health Authority, Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Service (DRSS), Llandough Hospital. 2 Dept. of Public Health and Microbiology, University of Turin, Italy.
Background and Aims: Managing chronic diseases requires that patients have correct perceptions of their condition and how to prevent complications through appropriate health beliefs, lifestyle changes and control of health practices. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is likely to occur during a patient's lifetime and regular screening prevents visual loss. This study was designed to verify how patients perceive DR, its screening and their own role in preventing blindness.
Methods: A questionnaire was administered to 258 consecutive patients after screening for DR, according to the European Field Guide-Book procedure, in Turin (n=130) and Wales (n=128, Group W). All Welsh patients and 70 in Turin (T1) were on standard medical care and education at their clinic or general practitioner, whereas the other 60 in Turin (T2) were on a permanent programme of diabetes care delivery through group tutoring. Statistical analysis was carried out first by comparing T2 patients with all those on standard medical care (T1 and W) and then the latter with each other. Comparisons were done by chi-square test on a 2x2 table.
Results: Diabetes may damage the eyes according to 100% and 84% of patients in groups T2 and T1, respectively, and 50% in Wales (p<0.01 vs T1 and T2). DR had been heard of by 100% (T2), 67% (T1) and 48% (W) (p<0.01 vs T1 and T2). In group T2, 82% of patients could give a meaningful description of DR, though only 17% could use correctly the word "retina", but only 18% and 16% in groups T1 and W (p<0.001 vs T2); these patients either did not know the word "retina" or believed it was outside the eye (e.g. it was the whole eye or even the screening operator or the camera). In groups T1 and W, respectively 57% and 47% of patients believed they could not help with eye care, whereas 78% in T2 replied they should control their diabetes and 20% that their eyes should be checked regularly (p<0.001). Regarding reasons for screening, 100% of patients in group T2 answered "prevention and checks", against 61% in T1 (p<0.001 vs T2) and only 9% in W (p<0.001 vs T1). In groups T1 and W, 33% and 37% said that they did not know why they were being screened while all T2 patients did know.
Conclusions: These preliminary data suggest that correct health perception and internal control mechanisms may be activated by permanent interactive education much more effectively than through information given during standard consultations.
|
