↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to diabetic foot care in a developing country with a high incidence of diabetes related amputations: an exploratory qualitative interview study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Barriers to diabetic foot care in a developing country with a high incidence of diabetes related amputations: an exploratory qualitative interview study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1043-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cornelia Guell, Nigel Unwin

Abstract

Diabetes related foot disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes. This is despite the fact that interventions to reduce the burden of diabetic foot disease are estimated to be highly cost effective, even cost saving in both developed and developing countries. This exploratory qualitative study was undertaken in a developing country known to have a very high rate of diabetes related amputations. The aim of the study was to explore barriers to foot care from the perspectives of health care professionals and patients, with a view to informing further work to develop effective interventions. Semi-structured interviews, each of 30 to 60 minutes, were conducted with a purposive sample of 20 individuals (11 health carers and 9 patients with diabetes). Participants were asked how diabetic foot care was experienced and practised, and about knowledge and attitudes relevant to care. Health carers were also asked how they negotiated issues of priority setting within the available resources. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and underwent thematic analysis. Three broad categories of potential barriers to diabetic foot care were identified. First, health carers reported that they and their patients tended to prioritise glycaemic control and that this often eclipsed foot care. Second, health carers described resistance to changing professional roles, particularly within the context of limited resources. Newly assigned foot screening and care duties did not fit in easily with their main work schedule. The overall effect of this was to lead to increased referrals to already overstretched, and difficult to access, podiatrists. Finally, patients reported a health care system with significant reliance on 'self-care' ability, including the need for time and expertise to negotiate access to scarce professional foot care appointments. The findings from this exploratory study provide insight on broad barriers to diabetic foot care within a developing country setting. The three areas identified deserve further investigation to determine their impact on the delivery of diabetic foot care and the implications for designing effective interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
Unknown 210 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 21%
Student > Bachelor 24 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 15 7%
Researcher 14 7%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 59 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 63 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 50 23%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Engineering 4 2%
Psychology 4 2%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 68 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 December 2018.
All research outputs
#7,467,636
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,705
of 7,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,901
of 268,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#56
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,597 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.