Potential for Self-Management in Chronic Care: Nurses' Assessments of Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although self-management interventions are, to some extent, individualized in clinical practice, the decision-making process is not fully understood. Exploring nurses' clinical reasoning about how and to what extent they currently tailor self-management support can provide new insights, enhancing process and outcome of chronic care. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore how nurses assess chronic patients concerning the potential of self-management and clinical reasoning with regard to tailoring care to the individual patient. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using grounded theory. Semistructured interviews were held with 15 nurses working within chronic care. All interviews were carried out from February to July 2013. RESULTS: All nurses provided individualized care; however, a nurse's view of self-management influenced how tailoring was performed. Substantial differences were seen in patient assessments and how care was individualized. Patients' motivation, capacities, mindset, needs, and preferences were obtained through communication, experience, intuition, and trusting relationships. A typology with four patient types emerged: the unmotivated patient, the patient with limited capacities, the oblivious patient, and the ideal patient. Nurses elaborated on using different approaches for patients in each of these groups. DISCUSSION: A nurse's perception of self-management substantially impacted how care was individualized. Patient assessment was the key driver of tailoring, which was performed in various ways, and influenced how and the extent to which care was individualized. To enable responding to the unique wishes and needs of individual patients, both scientific and educational efforts need to be directed toward systematic assessments of patient capacity to self-manage their disease.

Combining peer-led self-care interventions for people affected by leprosy or diabetes in leprosy-endemic countries. What do health care professionals think?

INTRODUCTION: Leprosy is slowly decreasing in incidence whereas diabetes is a growing health concern. Despite differences in aetiology, both diseases may lead to peripheral neuropathy and subsequent injuries and permanent impairments. There are also indications of similarities in psychosocial consequences. Prevention of Disability (POD) and self-management are often recommended for both diseases. This led to the idea of exploring the feasibility of combined peer-led self-care interventions for people with these disorders. OBJECTIVE: To explore the opinions of health care professionals about combining peer-led self-care interventions for people affected by leprosy or diabetes in leprosy-endemic countries. METHOD: An exploratory study was conducted to collect quantitative data by means of an e-questionnaire and qualitative data through in-depth semi-structured interviews with key informants. RESULTS: In total, 227 respondents answered the e-questionnaire and 22 in-depth interviews were conducted. Resemblances in physical complications between leprosy and diabetes were confirmed by the respondents. Psychosocial similarities included limitations in daily activity and in social participation, but stigma in leprosy was thought to be an important difference. Considerable overlap in current practices was found, mainly in patient education in POD, skin assessment and skin care, and the recommendation to use protective footwear. Knowledge exchange between leprosy and diabetes specialists is limited, although combined interventions were reported. The majority of respondents think that combined interventions are 'possible' (33.3%) or 'possible and promising' (30.8%). Professionals working with both diseases are more positive than those working with leprosy or diabetes only. The greatest barriers for combined interventions are perceived to be leprosy-related stigma, differences in underlying socio-economic status, attitudes of health care professionals and the current organization of health care systems. CONCLUSIONS: Responses indicate perspectives for combined interventions for the prevention of disabilities. For this, it is essential to intensify knowledge exchange between leprosy and diabetes professionals, to overcome barriers and to secure government policy support. Opportunities should be assessed in a situation-specific way.