Insights and Trends in Diabetes Education

Author:

Lenzi Martin Annette1,Lumber Terry2,Compton Terry3,Ernst Kristina4,Haas Linda5,Regan-Klich Janet6,Letassy Nancy7,McKnight Karen A.8,Nelson Joseph B.9,Seley Jane Jeffrie10,Toth Judith A.11,Mensing Carole12

Affiliation:

1. Lenzi Martin Communications, Inc, Chicago, Illinois

2. Inova Diabetes Center, Fairfax, Virginia, terry.lumber@inova.org

3. Southeastern University School of Nursing, Hammond, Louisiana

4. Division of Diabetes Translation, Atlanta, Georgia

5. Endocrinology Clinical Specialist, VA Puget Sound Seattle Division, Seattle, Washington

6. University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois

7. University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy, Edmond, Oklahoma

8. St Joseph Healthcare Diabetes Treatment Center, Lexington, Kentucky

9. Behavioral Medicine, Gordon Valley, Minnesota

10. New York Presbyterian/WC, New York, New York

11. Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois

12. Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, Massachusetts

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to describe current diabetes education practice and specific interventions and responsibilities of diabetes educators in the United States. Methods The 2008 National Practice Survey (NPS) instrument consisted of 53 items addressing diabetes education program structure, processes and interventions, outcomes and quality improvement activities, and the chronic care model. The survey was hosted online for American Association of Diabetes Educators (AADE) members. Participants totaled 2447 members, constituting a 25% return rate. Data from the 2008 NPS were analyzed and compared with results from previous surveys. Results Nearly two-thirds of respondents in 2008 provided diabetes education in a single location, most commonly in a clinical outpatient/managed care setting (39%). Most programs provided comprehensive services. Managers noted that 42% of their programs were either cost/revenue neutral or profitable. Programs varied in types of services, number of patient visits, team member functions, time spent on services, and instructional methods used. At least 50% of managers said their programs report outcome data, and 88% participate in quality/performance improvement activities. Nearly two-thirds of respondents were unfamiliar with the AADE-adopted chronic care model. Conclusions Many 2008 NPS results concur with those obtained in 2005 through 2007. Areas of variability among programs suggest a need for standardized interventions and prac- tice guidelines. Educators are encouraged to report out- comes to elucidate the contributions of their programs to patient care. AADE can use the results and comparative data obtained from the 2008 survey when developing practice, research, and advocacy activities

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Professions (miscellaneous),Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism

Cited by 9 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