Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
 
Articles by M. Peyrot
Total Records ( 8 ) for M. Peyrot
  J. H. Best , K. S. Boye , R. R. Rubin , D. Cao , T. H. Kim and M. Peyrot
  Aims  To assess treatment satisfaction and weight-related quality of life (QOL) in subjects with Type 2 diabetes treated with exenatide once weekly (QW) or twice daily (BID).

Methods  In this 52-week randomized, multi-centre, open-label study, 295 subjects managed with diet and exercise and/or oral glucose-lowering medications received either exenatide QW or BID during weeks 1-30; thereafter, subjects receiving exenatide BID were switched to exenatide QW, with 258 total subjects receiving exenatide QW during weeks 30-52. Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-status (DTSQ-s) and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite (IWQOL-Lite) were assessed at baseline and weeks 30 and 52. Mean group changes from baseline to week 30 were estimated by ancova; changes from week 30 to week 52 were assessed by Student's t-test.

Results  Statistically significant improvements from baseline to week 30 were observed in both treatment groups for DTSQ-s and IWQOL-Lite measures, with significantly greater reduction in perceived frequency of hyperglycaemia and greater satisfaction with continuing treatment in the QW group compared with the BID group. Effect sizes for change in DTSQ-s total scores were 0.84 QW, 0.64 BID; for IWQOL-Lite: 0.96 QW, 0.82 BID. Treatment satisfaction and QOL improved significantly between weeks 30 and 52 for those switching from BID to QW. Occurrence of adverse events did not affect patients' improvements in treatment satisfaction and QOL.

Conclusions  Patients treated with exenatide QW or BID experienced significant and clinically meaningful improvements in treatment satisfaction and QOL. Patients who switched from exenatide BID to exenatide QW administration reported further significant improvements.

  M. Peyrot , A. H. Barnett , L. F. Meneghini and P.-M. Schumm-Draeger
  Aims  To examine patient and physician beliefs regarding insulin therapy and the degree to which patients adhere to their insulin regimens.

Methods  Internet survey of 1250 physicians (600 specialists, 650 primary care physicians) who treat patients with diabetes and telephone survey of 1530 insulin-treated patients (180 with Type 1 diabetes, 1350 with Type 2 diabetes) in China, France, Japan, Germany, Spain, Turkey, the UK or the USA.

Results  One third (33.2%) of patients reported insulin omission/non-adherence at least 1 day in the last month, with an average of 3.3 days. Three quarters (72.5%) of physicians report that their typical patient does not take their insulin as prescribed, with a mean of 4.3 days per month of basal insulin omission/non-adherence and 5.7 days per month of prandial insulin omission/non-adherence. Patients and providers indicated the same five most common reasons for insulin omission/non-adherence: too busy; travelling; skipped meals; stress/emotional problems; public embarrassment. Physicians reported low patient success at initiating insulin in a timely fashion and adjusting insulin doses. Most physicians report that many insulin-treated patients do not have adequate glucose control (87.6%) and that they would treat more aggressively if not for concern about hypoglycaemia (75.5%). Although a majority of patients (and physicians) regard insulin treatment as restrictive, more patients see insulin treatment as having positive than negative impacts on their lives.

Conclusions  Glucose control is inadequate among insulin-treated patients, in part attributable to insulin omission/non-adherence and lack of dose adjustment. There is a need for insulin regimens that are less restrictive and burdensome with lower risk of hypoglycaemia.

  M. Peyrot , Q. Harshaw , A. C. Shillington , Y. Xu and R. R. Rubin
  Aim  To assess the reliability and validity of the Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire among 537 US adults with Type 2 diabetes using five different diabetes medication regimens (oral agents with and without insulin; insulin only by syringe and by pen; glucagon-like peptide 1 agents).

Methods  The Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire assesses the treatment experience of patients using any diabetes medication system that uses nine measures (Convenience, Negative Events, Interference, Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Burden, Efficacy, Social Burden, Psychological Well-Being, Treatment Satisfaction, Treatment Preference). It was administered via an initial online survey, along with other validated measures of treatment satisfaction and medication adherence, with a retest administered within 2 weeks. Participants were 52.5% male, 57.4% aged 40-64 years, 83.6% white and 95.2% non-Hispanic. Most (75.6%) had attended college and 58.3% had been diagnosed with diabetes for more than 10 years.

Results  Median inter-item agreement was 0.86. Median test-retest reliability was also 0.86. All correlations between Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire measures and criterion measures of treatment satisfaction and adherence were statistically significant (P < 0.01) in the expected direction. Correlations between Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire and the corresponding criterion measures of treatment satisfaction ranged from 0.349 to 0.629 (absolute values; interpolated median 0.568); correlations of the same measures with adherence ranged from 0.384 to 0.450 (absolute values; mean 0.411). Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire measures differentiated among groups taking different medications and those using different delivery systems for the same medication.

Conclusions  This study suggests that the Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire has good reliability and validity and provides a more comprehensive set of measures than existing medication satisfaction questionnaires.

  K. D. Barnard , M. Peyrot and R. I. G. Holt
  Not available
  M. Peyrot and R. R. Rubin
 

Aim

To identify insulin delivery system perceptions that contributed to improvements in overall satisfaction with insulin therapy (treatment satisfaction) that were larger in those using sensor-augmented pump therapy than those using multiple daily injections with self monitoring of blood glucose.

Methods

The Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1C Reduction 3 (STAR 3), a randomized 12-month clinical trial, compared sensor-augmented pump therapy to multiple daily injections + self monitoring of blood glucose in adult and paediatric patients. The Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire measured perceptions of convenience, problems, interference with daily activities, blood glucose monitoring burden, social burden, clinical efficacy, diabetes worries and psychological well-being, as well as treatment satisfaction. We conducted separate multiple regression analyses for the 334 adult patients and 147 paediatric patients and their caregivers to assess the independent associations (P < 0.05) between change from baseline to follow-up in user perceptions and treatment satisfaction.

Results

Increased convenience was associated with improved treatment satisfaction in all user groups. Reduced interference with daily activities (caregivers), reduced social burden (adults) and increased efficacy (both) also were associated with improved treatment satisfaction.

Conclusions

Treatment satisfaction among children was primarily a function of convenience, while perceived clinical efficacy was also a primary determinant among adults, reflecting different emphases on the treatment process itself vs. treatment consequences. Among adult patients and caregivers, improved treatment satisfaction was also a function of reductions in social burden and interference with daily activities (respectively), reflecting concern with the broader psychosocial impact of sensor-augmented pump therapy on their lives.

  A. Nicolucci , K. Kovacs Burns , R. I. G. Holt , M. Comaschi , N. Hermanns , H. Ishii , A. Kokoszka , F. Pouwer , S. E. Skovlund , H. Stuckey , I. Tarkun , M. Vallis , J. Wens and M. Peyrot
 

Aims

The second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study aimed to assess psychosocial outcomes in people with diabetes across countries for benchmarking.

Methods

Surveys included new and adapted questions from validated questionnaires that assess health-related quality of life, self-management, attitudes/beliefs, social support and priorities for improving diabetes care. Questionnaires were conducted online, by telephone or in person.

Results

Participants were 8596 adults with diabetes across 17 countries. There were significant between-country differences for all benchmarking indicators; no one country's outcomes were consistently better or worse than others. The proportion with likely depression [WHO-5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5) score ≤ 28] was 13.8% (country range 6.5-24.1%). Diabetes-related distress [Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale 5 (PAID-5) score ≥ 40] was reported by 44.6% of participants (17.2-67.6%). Overall quality of life was rated ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ by 12.2% of participants (7.6-26.1%). Diabetes had a negative impact on all aspects investigated, ranging from 20.5% on relationship with family/friends to 62.2% on physical health. Approximately 40% of participants (18.6-64.9%) reported that their medication interfered with their ability to live a normal life. The availability of person-centred chronic illness care and support for active involvement was rated as low. Following self-care advice for medication and diet was most common, and least common for glucose monitoring and foot examination, with marked country variation. Only 48.8% of respondents had participated in diabetes educational programmes/activities to help manage their diabetes.

Conclusions

Cross-national benchmarking using psychometrically validated indicators can help identify areas for improvement and best practices to drive changes that improve outcomes for people with diabetes.

  K. Kovacs Burns , A. Nicolucci , R. I. G. Holt , I. Willaing , N. Hermanns , S. Kalra , J. Wens , F. Pouwer , S. E. Skovlund and M. Peyrot
 

Aims

The second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study examined the experiences of family members of people with diabetes for benchmarking and identifying unmet needs or areas for improvement to assist family members and those with diabetes to effectively self-manage.

Methods

In total, 2057 family members of people with diabetes participated in an online, telephone or in-person survey designed to assess the impact of diabetes on family life, family support for people with diabetes and educational and community support.

Results

Supporting a relative with diabetes was perceived as a burden by 35.3% (range across countries 10.6-61.7%) of respondents. Over half of respondents [51.4% (22.5-76.0%)] rated their quality of life as ‘good’ or ‘very good’. However, distress about the person with diabetes was high, with 61.3% (31.5-86.4%) worried about hypoglycaemia. The impact of diabetes on aspects of life was felt by 51.8% (46.9-58.6%). The greatest negative effect was on emotional well-being [44.6% (31.8-63.0%)], although depression was less common [11.6% (4.2-20.0%)]. Many respondents did not know how to help the person with diabetes [37.1% (17.5-53.0%)] and wanted to be more involved in their care [39.4% (15.5-61.7%)]. Participation in diabetes educational programmes was low [23.1% (9.4-43.3%)], although most of those who participated found them helpful [72.1% (42.1-90.3%)].

Conclusions

Diabetes has a negative impact on family members of people with diabetes. DAWN2 provides benchmarking indicators of family members' psychosocial needs that will help identify the support required for, and from, them to improve the lives of people with diabetes and their families.

  R. I. G. Holt , A. Nicolucci , K. Kovacs Burns , M. Escalante , A. Forbes , N. Hermanns , S. Kalra , M. Massi-Benedetti , A. Mayorov , E. Menendez-Torre , N. Munro , S. E. Skovlund , I. Tarkun , J. Wens and M. Peyrot
 

Aims

The second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study sought cross-national comparisons of perceptions on healthcare provision for benchmarking and sharing of clinical practices to improve diabetes care.

Methods

In total, 4785 healthcare professionals caring for people with diabetes across 17 countries participated in an online survey designed to assess diabetes healthcare provision, self-management and training.

Results

Between 61.4 and 92.9% of healthcare professionals felt that people with diabetes needed to improve various self-management activities; glucose monitoring (range, 29.3-92.1%) had the biggest country difference, with a between-country variance of 20%. The need for a major improvement in diabetes self-management education was reported by 60% (26.4-81.4%) of healthcare professionals, with a 12% between-country variance. Provision of diabetes services differed among countries, with many healthcare professionals indicating that major improvements were needed across a range of areas, including healthcare organization [30.6% (7.4-67.1%)], resources for diabetes prevention [78.8% (60.4-90.5%)], earlier diagnosis and treatment [67.9% (45.0-85.5%)], communication between team members and people with diabetes [56.1% (22.3-85.4%)], specialist nurse availability [63.8% (27.9-90.7%)] and psychological support [62.7% (40.6-79.6%)]. In some countries, up to one third of healthcare professionals reported not having received any formal diabetes training. Societal discrimination against people with diabetes was reported by 32.8% (11.4-79.6%) of participants.

Conclusions

This survey has highlighted concerns of healthcare professionals relating to diabetes healthcare provision, self-management and training. Identifying between-country differences in several areas will allow benchmarking and sharing of clinical practices.

 
 
 
Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility