Diabetic patients' knowledge of therapeutic goals in Kuwait

6Citations
Citations of this article
70Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to analyze patients' knowledge about therapeutic goals for diabetic patients and factors associated with good knowledge. Methods: A total of 266 diabetic patients were randomly selected from 6 diabetes clinics in Kuwait to be included in a cross-sectional patient survey. Data were collected via face-to-face structured interviews using a pretested questionnaire. Descriptive and logistic regression analysis was used in data analysis. Results: The response rate was 93% (n = 247). The percentages [95% confidence interval (CI)] of patients who reported knowing their recent levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), blood pressure (BP), and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were 5% (2-8), 54% (48-60), and 8% (5-11), respectively. The percentages (95% CI) of patients who admitted knowing the target goals for LDL-C, BP, HbA1c, fasting, and postprandial blood glucose levels were 3% (1-6), 49% (43-55), 6% (3-9), 62% (56-68) and 55% (49-61), respectively. Correct target goals for LDL-C, BP, HbA1c, fasting, and postprandial blood glucose levels were reported by 2% (1-4), 43% (37-49), 5% (2-8), 60% (54-66), and 47% (41-53), respectively. Those with a high education (OR = 4.76; 95% CI 2.34-9.68) and those with a family history of diabetes (OR = 3.05; 95% CI 1.50-6.19) had good knowledge about correct targets. Conclusion: The current findings revealed that lack of knowledge about recent levels of BP, LDL-C and HbA1c and therapeutic goals was alarmingly high, which highlights the need for the implementation of an effective multidisciplinary team approach to encourage patient education and self-care. Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Awad, A., Dalle, H., & Enlund, H. (2011). Diabetic patients’ knowledge of therapeutic goals in Kuwait. Medical Principles and Practice, 20(2), 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1159/000321198

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free