Cargando…

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of a Mobile Insulin Titration Intervention for Patients With Uncontrolled Diabetes: A Qualitative Analysis

BACKGROUND: In 2016, a short message service text messaging intervention to titrate insulin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes was implemented at two health care facilities in New York City. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct a qualitative evaluation assessing barriers to and the faci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rogers, Erin, Aidasani, Sneha R, Friedes, Rebecca, Hu, Lu, Langford, Aisha T, Moloney, Dana N, Orzeck-Byrnes, Natasha, Sevick, Mary Ann, Levy, Natalie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6693299/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31368439
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13906
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In 2016, a short message service text messaging intervention to titrate insulin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes was implemented at two health care facilities in New York City. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct a qualitative evaluation assessing barriers to and the facilitators of the implementation of the Mobile Insulin Titration Intervention (MITI) program into usual care. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 36 patients enrolled in the MITI program and the staff involved in MITI (n=19) in the two health care systems. Interviews were transcribed and iteratively coded by two study investigators, both inductively and deductively using a codebook guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Multiple facilitator themes emerged: (1) MITI had strong relative advantages to in-person titration, including its convenience and time-saving design, (2) the free cost of MITI was important to the patients, (3) MITI was easy to use and the patients were confident in their ability to use it, (4) MITI was compatible with the patients’ home routines and clinic workflow, (5) the patients and staff perceived MITI to have value beyond insulin titration by reminding and motivating the patients to engage in healthy behaviors and providing a source of patient support, and (6) implementation in clinics was made easy by having a strong implementation climate, communication networks to spread information about MITI, and a strong program champion. The barriers identified included the following: (1) language limitations, (2) initial nurse concerns about the scope of practice changes required to deliver MITI, (3) initial provider knowledge gaps about the program, and (4) provider perceptions that MITI might not be appropriate for some patients (eg, older or not tech-savvy). There was also a theme that emerged during the patient and staff interviews of an unmet need for long-term additional diabetes management support among this population, specifically diet, nutrition, and exercise support. CONCLUSIONS: The patients and staff were overwhelmingly supportive of MITI and believed that it had many benefits and that it was compatible with the clinic workflow and patients’ lives. Initial implementation efforts should address staff training and nurse concerns. Future research should explore options for integrating additional diabetes support for patients.