Methodological Issues in Diabetes Research: Measuring adherence

Author:

Johnson Suzanne Bennett1

Affiliation:

1. Departments of Psychiatry, Pediatrics, and Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida Health Sciences Center Gainesville, Florida

Abstract

The prevalence of nonadherence in IDDM and NIDDM populations and conceptual and methodological issues relevant to measuring diabetes regimen adherence are reviewed. The prevalence of nonadherence varies across the different components of the diabetes regimen, during the course of the disease, and across the patient's life span. Although prevalence rates might be expected to differ between IDDM and NIDDM populations, this rarely has been evaluated. Conceptual problems in defining and measuring adherence include: the absence of explicit adherence standards against which the patient's behavior can be compared; inadvertent noncompliance attributable to patient-provider miscommunication and patient knowledge/skill deficits; the behavioral complexity of the diabetes regimen; and the confounding of compliance with diabetes control. Methods for measuring adherence include: health status indicators, provider ratings, behavioral observations, permanent products, and patient self-reports, including behavior ratings, diaries, and 24-h recall interviews. A measurement method should be selected on the basis of reliability, validity, nonreactivity, sensitivity to the complexity of diabetes regimen behaviors, and measurement independence from the patient's health status. The timing of measurements should be based on the stability of adherence behaviors and temporal congruity with other measures of interest (e.g., indexes of metabolic control). Directions for future research and suggestions for clinical practice are provided.

Publisher

American Diabetes Association

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine

Cited by 142 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3