Dhippayom Teerapon, Chaiyakunapruk Nathorn, Krass Ines
Pharmaceutical Care Research Unit, Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok 65000, Thailand; Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Discipline of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Selangor, Malaysia; Center of Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research, Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand; School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia; School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014 Jun;104(3):329-42. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2014.01.008. Epub 2014 Jan 15.
This review aimed to explore the extent of the use of diabetes risk assessment tools and to determine influential variables associated with the implementation of these tools. CINAHL, Google Scholar, ISI Citation Indexes, PubMed, and Scopus were searched from inception to January 2013. Studies that reported the use of diabetes risk assessment tools to identify individuals at risk of diabetes were included. Of the 1719 articles identified, 24 were included. Follow-up of high risk individuals for diagnosis of diabetes was conducted in 5 studies. Barriers to the uptake of diabetes risk assessment tools by healthcare practitioners included (1) attitudes toward the tools; (2) impracticality of using the tools and (3) lack of reimbursement and regulatory support. Individuals were reluctant to undertake self-assessment of diabetes risk due to (1) lack of perceived severity of type 2 diabetes; (2) impracticality of the tools; and (3) concerns related to finding out the results. The current use of non-invasive diabetes risk assessment scores as screening tools appears to be limited. Practical follow up systems as well as strategies to address other barriers to the implementation of diabetes risk assessment tools are essential and need to be developed.
本综述旨在探讨糖尿病风险评估工具的使用程度,并确定与这些工具实施相关的影响变量。检索了CINAHL、谷歌学术、ISI引文索引、PubMed和Scopus数据库,检索时间从建库至2013年1月。纳入报告使用糖尿病风险评估工具来识别糖尿病风险个体的研究。在检索出的1719篇文章中,纳入了24篇。5项研究对高危个体进行了糖尿病诊断随访。医疗从业者采用糖尿病风险评估工具的障碍包括:(1)对工具的态度;(2)工具使用不实用;(3)缺乏报销和监管支持。个体不愿进行糖尿病风险自我评估的原因包括:(1)对2型糖尿病严重性认识不足;(2)工具不实用;(3)对知晓结果的担忧。目前将非侵入性糖尿病风险评估分数用作筛查工具的情况似乎有限。实用的随访系统以及解决糖尿病风险评估工具实施中其他障碍的策略至关重要,需要加以开发。