IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v28y2019i17-18p3318-3329.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: A balance between benefits and barriers: A critical incident study

Author

Listed:
  • Beate Sørgård
  • Marjolein M. Iversen
  • Jan Mårtensson

Abstract

Aims and objectives To describe positively and negatively perceived situations experienced by adults with type 1 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring and the actions they take to deal with these situations. Background Real‐time continuous glucose monitoring has been shown to improve glycaemic control and reduce hypoglycaemia. Although many patients with type 1 diabetes report great benefits when using continuous glucose monitoring, a substantial number discontinue using the device. Little is known about the different situations and experiences with the daily use of continuous glucose monitoring that contribute to such differences. Design A descriptive design based on the critical incident technique was used. The study complied with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) (see File S1). Methods Individual interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 23 adults with type 1 diabetes, including current and former users of continuous glucose monitoring from four different outpatient clinics. Results The participants described that they felt that the use of continuous glucose monitoring was a balance between benefits and barriers, and how, through their actions, they tried to adapt their use of continuous glucose monitoring to fit their lifestyles. Various life events affected and altered the balance between benefits and barriers and thus affected their use of continuous glucose monitoring. Conclusions Continuous glucose monitoring is perceived as an effective and important tool in the self‐management of diabetes type 1. It enables a better everyday life and increased satisfaction with treatment. At the same time, the use of continuous glucose monitoring can be both demanding and challenging. Relevance to clinical practice Understanding the complex interplay between perceived benefits, treatment burden and adherence to continuous glucose monitoring use is important for nurses engaged in diabetes care. Education and support regarding the use of continuous glucose monitoring must be based on the understanding and perspectives of the patient to alleviate stress and barriers and enhance self‐efficacy. As the use of continuous glucose monitoring can change over time, this must be a continuous process beyond initial training.

Suggested Citation

  • Beate Sørgård & Marjolein M. Iversen & Jan Mårtensson, 2019. "Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: A balance between benefits and barriers: A critical incident study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(17-18), pages 3318-3329, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3318-3329
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14911
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14911?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aujoulat, Isabelle & Marcolongo, Renzo & Bonadiman, Leopoldo & Deccache, Alain, 2008. "Reconsidering patient empowerment in chronic illness: A critique of models of self-efficacy and bodily control," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(5), pages 1228-1239, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mariam Kashani & Arn Eliasson & Elaine Walizer & Clarie Fuller & Renata Engler & Todd Villines & Marina Vernalis, 2016. "Early Empowerment Strategies Boost Self-Efficacy to Improve Cardiovascular Health Behaviors," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(9), pages 322-322, September.
    2. Chiara Cant? & Alessandra Tzannis, 2016. "The service innovation in healthcare network," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(4), pages 109-130.
    3. Sarianne Wiklund Axelsson & Åsa Wikberg-Nilsson & Anita Melander Wikman, 2016. "Sustainable Lifestyle Change—Participatory Design of Support Together with Persons with Obesity in the Third Age," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Giuseppe Russo & Andrea Moretta Tartaglione & Ylenia Cavacece, 2019. "Empowering Patients to Co-Create a Sustainable Healthcare Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Balta, Maria & Valsecchi, Raffaella & Papadopoulos, Thanos & Bourne, Dorota Joanna, 2021. "Digitalization and co-creation of healthcare value: A case study in Occupational Health," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    6. Jae-Mahn Shim, 2022. "Patient Agency: Manifestations of Individual Agency Among People With Health Problems," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    7. Tania Burchardt & Martin Evans & Holly Holder, 2012. "Measuring Inequality: Autonomy The degree of empowerment in decisions about one’s own life," CASE Reports casereport74, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    8. Radaelli, Giovanni & Lettieri, Emanuele & Frattini, Federico & Luzzini, Davide & Boaretto, Andrea, 2017. "Users' search mechanisms and risks of inappropriateness in healthcare innovations: The role of literacy and trust in professional contexts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 240-251.
    9. Fumagalli, Lia Paola & Radaelli, Giovanni & Lettieri, Emanuele & Bertele’, Paolo & Masella, Cristina, 2015. "Patient Empowerment and its neighbours: Clarifying the boundaries and their mutual relationships," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 384-394.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3318-3329. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.