Citation Emslie-Smith AM, Evans J, Leese G & Morris AD (2001) Knowledge of the findings of the UK prospective diabetes study (UKPDS) amongst UK general practitioners. 37th Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, Glasgow, 09/09/2001 - 13/09/2001. Diabetologia, 44 (August Supplement 1), pp. A250-A250. http://www.springerlink.com/content/0012-186x/44/s1/
Abstract Background and Aims: To assess UK General Practitioners' level of knowledge of the findings of the UKPDS.
Materials and Melhods: 25 questions, based on UKPDS findings, were posted, in June 2000, to all 109General Practitioners, and to two Diabctologistsin the city of'Dundee,UK.
Results: 61 questionnaires (56%) were returned. Mean score = 25.6% (range 0-68%). There was no significant difference in mean score between those in Practices of a certain size, Training Practices or Practices with dedicated diabetes clinics, nor between GPs who subscribed to the British Medical Journal, were members of the Royal College of General Practice or who were GP Trainers, and those who were not. GPs who were actively involved in diabetes care in their Practice (n~30, mean score 31.4%) scoredbetter (p=0.01) than those who were not (n=3I, mean score 19.5%). There was no significant difference in correct answers to questions relating to glycaemic control (n> 12, average % correct 26.0%) compared with those relating to blood pressure control (n~JJ, average % correct 24.9%). 37.7% (46.7% if active in diabetes care, 29.0% if not) knew that UKPOS was restricted 10 Type 2 diabetes. Questions on different drug treatment approaches showed correct knowledge in 18.0% (25.0% ifactive, 11.3% if not) of respondents for glycaemic therapy and 39.3% (46.7% if active, 32.3% if not) for blood pressure therapy. Correct knowledge of targets for control of glycaemia and blood pressure, developed as a result of UKPDS, was shown by 34.4% (46.7% if active, 22.6% if not) and 47.5% (63.3% if active, 32.3% if not) respectively. Both Diabetologists answered 24 questions correctly (96%).
Conclusions: General Practitioners provide most Type 2 diabetes care in UK. However, their level of knowledge of the UKPDS findings appears to be low. The significant difference between those active in diabetes care and others, demonstrates the trend towards subspecialisation within General Practice. If evidence-basedmedicine is to be practised, new methods must be found to more effectively educate Grs of trial findings.
Notes Output Type: Meeting Abstract
Journal Diabetologia: Volume 44, Issue August Supplement 1
Emslie-Smith, Alistair M; Evans, Josie; Leese, Graham; Morris, Andrew D