Skip to main content

05-02-2018 | Type 2 diabetes | Article

General practitioners’ attitudes towards patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study

Journal: BMC Family Practice

Authors: Anja Wollny, Michael Pentzek, Oliver Rudolf Herber, Heinz-Harald Abholz, Jürgen in der Schmitten, Andrea Icks, Stefan Wilm, Elisabeth Gummersbach

Publisher: BioMed Central




Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with poor glycaemic control can represent a challenge from the perspective of the general practitioner (GP). Apart from patient-sided factors, the understanding of GPs’ attitudes may provide ideas for improved management in these patients. The aim of this study is to reveal attitudes of GPs towards T2DM patients with poor metabolic control.


Qualitative research in German general practice; 20 GPs, randomly chosen from participants of a larger study; in-depth narrative interviews, audio-recorded and transcribed; inductive coding and categorisation in a multi-professional team; abstraction of major themes in terms of attitudinal responses.


1) Orientation on laboratory parameters: GPs see it as their medical responsibility to achieve targets, which instil a sense of security. 2) Resignation: GPs believe their efforts are in vain and see their role as being undermined. 3) Devaluation of the patient: GPs blame the “non-compliance” of the patients and experience care as a series of conflicts. 4) Fixed role structure: The expert GP on the one hand, the ignorant patient on the other. 5) Solidarity with the patient: GPs appreciate a doctor-patient relationship in terms of partnership.


The conflict GPs experience between their sense of duty and feelings of futility may lead to perceptions such as personal defeat and insecurity. GPs (and patients) may benefit from adjusting the patient-doctor relationship with regard to shared definitions of realistic and authentic goals.
Hogg M, Vaughan G. Social psychology. London: Prentice-Hall; 2005.
Fazio RH, Roskos-Ewoldsen DR. Acting as we feel: when and how attitudes guide behavior. In: Shavitt S, Brock TC, editors. Persuasion: psychological insights and perspectives. Needham Heights MA: Allyn Bacon; 1994. p. 71–93.
Cameron KA. Theories in health communication research. A practitioner’s guide to persuasion: an overview of 15 selected persuasion theories, models and frameworks. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74:309–17. CrossRefPubMed
Freeman J, Loewe R. Barriers to communication about diabetes mellitus. Patients’ and practitioners’ different views of the disease. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:507–12. PubMed
Olivarius N, Palmvig B, Helms Andreasen A, Thorgersen J, Hundrup C. An educational model for improving diet counselling in primary care. A case study of the creative use of doctors’ own diet, their attitudes to it and to nutritional counselling of their patients with diabetes. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58:199–202. CrossRef
Street RL Jr, Gordon H, Haidet P. Practitioners’ communication and perceptions of patients: is it how they look, how they talk, or is it just the doctor? Soc Sci Med. 2007;65:586–98. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
An PG, Rabatin JS, Manwell LB, Linzer M, Brown RL, Schwartz MD for the MEMO Investigators. Burden of difficult encounters in primary are: data from the minimizing error, maximizing out-comes study. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:410–4. CrossRefPubMed
Street RL Jr, Makoul G, Arora NK, Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician-patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74:295–301. CrossRefPubMed
Nicholas J, Charlton J, Dregan A, Gulliford MC. Recent HbA1c values and mortality risk in type 2 diabetes. PLoS One. 2013;8:e68008. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Altenhofen L, Hagen B, Hansen L. Ergebnisse zur DMP-Umsetzung in der region Nordrhein. In: Günster C, Klose J, Schmacke N, editors. Versorgungs-report 2011: Schwerpunkt Chronische Erkrankungen. Stuttgart: Schattauer; 2010. p. 69–72.
Grant RW, Ashburner JM, Hong CS, Chang Y, Barry MJ, Atlas SJ. Defining patient complexity from the primary care Physician's perspective. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:797–804. CrossRefPubMed
Jeavons D, Hungin APS, Cornford CS. Patients with poorly controlled diabetes in primary care: healthcare clinicians’ beliefs and attitudes. Postgrad Med J. 2006;82:347–50. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Moreau A, Aroles V, Souweine G, et al. Patient versus general physician perception of problems with treatment adherence in type 2 diabetes. Eur J Gen Pract. 2009;15:147–53. CrossRefPubMed
Anderson R, Robins L. How do we know? Reflections on qualitative research in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:1387–8. CrossRefPubMed
Wilm S, Abholz HH, Gummersbach E, Icks A, Pentzek M. Patients with poorly regulated type 2 diabetes – health psychological characterization. Diabetologe. 2014;10:200–206. [German].
Jovchelovitch S, Bauer MW. Narrative interviewing. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Qualitative research with text, image and sound: a practical handbook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2000. p. 57–74.
Chase SE. Taking narrative seriously: consequences for method and theory in interview studies. In: Lincoln YS, Denzin NK, editors. Turning points in qualitative research. Lanham: AltaMira Press; 2003. p. 273–96.
Hsieh HF, Shannon S. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277–88. CrossRefPubMed
Moser A, Korstjens I. Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017; doi: https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13814788.​2017.​1375091.
Korstjens I, Moser A. Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017; doi: https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13814788.​2017.​1375092.
Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107–15. CrossRefPubMed
Brown J, Harris S, Webster-Bogaet S, Wetmore S, Faulds C, Steward M. The role of patient, practitioner and systemic factors in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Fam Pract. 2002;19:344–9. CrossRefPubMed
Wens J, Vermeire E, Van Royen P, Sabbe B, Denekens J. Practitioners’ perspectives of type 2 diabetes patients’ adherence to treatment: a qualitative analysis of barriers and solutions. BMC Fam Pract. 2005;6:20. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Ketterer F, Symons L, Lambrechts MC, et al. What factors determine Belgian general practitioners’ approaches to detecting and managing substance abuse? A qualitative study based on the I-change model. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:119. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Nabitz U, van den Brink W, Walburg J. A quality framework for addiction treatment programs. Addict Behav. 2005;30:1254–60. CrossRefPubMed
Heisler M, Vijan S, Anderson RM, Ubel PA, Bernstein SJ, Hofer TP. When do patients and their practitioners agree on diabetes treatment goals and strategies, and what difference does it make? J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:893–902. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Beverly E, Hultgren B, Brooks K, Ritholz M, Abrahamson MJ, Weinger K. Understanding physicians’ challenges when treating type 2 diabetic patients’ social and emotional difficulties. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:1086–8. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Chapman EN, Kaatz A, Carnes M. Physicians and implicit bias: how doctors may unwittingly perpetuate health care disparities. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:1504–10. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Galinsky AD, Moskowitz GB. Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78:708–24. CrossRefPubMed
Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. Am Psychol. 2002;57:705–17. CrossRefPubMed
Pierce D, Gunn J. Using problem solving therapy in general practice. Aust Fam Physician. 2007;36:230–3. PubMed
Asimakopoulou K, Newton P, Sinclair AJ, Scambler S. Health care professionals’ understanding and day-to-day practice of patient empowerment in diabetes; time to pause for thought? Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;95:224–9. CrossRefPubMed

New additions to the Adis Journal Club

A selection of topical peer-reviewed articles from the Adis journals, curated by the editors.

ADA 2022 coverage

Access the latest news and expert insight from the ADA 82nd Scientific Sessions