What is important for you? A qualitative interview study of living with diabetes and experiences of diabetes care to establish a basis for a tailored Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for the Swedish National Diabetes Register

OBJECTIVES: There is a growing emphasis on the perspective of individuals living with diabetes and the need for a more person-centred diabetes care. At present, the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) lacks patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) based on the perspective of the patient. As a basis for a new PROM, the aim of this study was to describe important aspects in life for adult individuals with diabetes. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews analysed using content analysis. SETTING: Hospital-based outpatient clinics and primary healthcare clinics in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: 29 adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) (n=15) and type 2 DM (n=14). INCLUSION CRITERIA: Swedish adults (≥18 years) living with type 1 DM or type 2 DM (duration ≥5 years) able to describe their situation in Swedish. Purposive sampling generated heterogeneous characteristics. RESULTS: To live a good life with diabetes is demanding for the individual, but experienced barriers can be eased by support from others in the personal sphere, and by professional support from diabetes care. Diabetes care was a crucial resource to nurture the individual's ability and knowledge to manage diabetes, and to facilitate life with diabetes by supplying support, guidance, medical treatment and technical devices tailored to individual needs. The analysis resulted in the overarching theme 'To live a good life with diabetes' constituting the two main categories 'How I feel and how things are going with my diabetes' and 'Support from diabetes care in managing diabetes' including five different categories. CONCLUSIONS: Common aspects were identified including the experience of living with diabetes and support from diabetes care. These will be used to establish a basis for a tailored PROM for the NDR.

Knowledge translation in Uganda : a qualitative study of Ugandan midwives' and managers' perceived relevance of the sub-elements of the context cornerstone in the PARIHS framework

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of the annual 3.3 million neonatal deaths could be averted if there was a high uptake of basic evidence-based practices. In order to overcome this 'know-do' gap, there is an urgent need for in-depth understanding of knowledge translation (KT). A major factor to consider in the successful translation of knowledge into practice is the influence of organizational context. A theoretical framework highlighting this process is Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS). However, research linked to this framework has almost exclusively been conducted in high-income countries. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the perceived relevance of the subelements of the organizational context cornerstone of the PARIHS framework, and also whether other factors in the organizational context were perceived to influence KT in a specific low-income setting. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted in a district of Uganda, where focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews were conducted with midwives (n = 18) and managers (n = 5) within the catchment area of the general hospital. The interview guide was developed based on the context sub-elements in the PARIHS framework (receptive context, culture, leadership, and evaluation). Interviews were transcribed verbatim, followed by directed content analysis of the data. RESULTS: The sub-elements of organizational context in the PARIHS framework--i.e., receptive context, culture, leadership, and evaluation--also appear to be relevant in a low-income setting like Uganda, but there are additional factors to consider. Access to resources, commitment and informal payment, and community involvement were all perceived to play important roles for successful KT. CONCLUSIONS: In further development of the context assessment tool, assessing factors for successful implementation of evidence in low-income settings--resources, community involvement, and commitment and informal payment--should be considered for inclusion. For low-income settings, resources are of significant importance, and might be considered as a separate subelement of the PARIHS framework as a whole.