Group consultations in diabetes care: qualitative insights from patients and practitioners to inform service redesign
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15277/bjd.2025.493Keywords:
Group consultations, diabetes management, qualitative research, primary care, patient engagement, structured education, tailored group modelsAbstract
Aims: To identify the barriers and enablers influencing the uptake and delivery of diabetes group consultations, drawing insights from patients' and healthcare professionals’ perspectives.
Methods: Between September and May 2025, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and primary care healthcare professionals. Participants were interviewed to discuss facilitators and barriers to attending or referring patients to attend diabetes group consultations. Using thematic analysis, interviews were coded based on Braun and Clarke's six-phase framework.
Results: A total of 11 patients [eight attendees, three non-attendees] and 10 healthcare professionals [GPs, nurses, trainees] agreed to participate in this study. Key barriers identified include logistical challenges (such as scheduling and accessibility), difficulty relating to group dynamics, content relevance and unclear communication about session goals and benefits. Enablers to improve engagement, included structured education on medication management, diet and weight loss, patient segmentation and tailored group models. Peer support also emerged as a factor in reducing patient isolation and fostering shared learning.
Conclusions: Uptake of group consultations can be improved by enhancing communication strategies, implementing balanced structured education with facilitated peer sharing, and offering flexible attendance options such as virtual participation or rotational clinics. By addressing barriers and leveraging enablers, group consultations can become a more effective and accessible resource for supporting diabetes management, enhancing patient outcomes and reducing pressures on individual clinical appointments.
References
Edeghere S, English P. Management of type 2 diabetes: now and the future. Clin Med (Lond) 2019;19(5):403–05. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmed.2019-0318
Blaslov K, Naranđa FS, Kruljac I, Renar IP. Treatment approach to type 2 diabetes: past, present and future. World J Diabetes 2018;9(12):209–19. https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v9.i12.209
Borse SP, Chhipa AS, Sharma V, Singh DP, Nivsarkar M. Management of type 2 diabetes: current strategies, unfocussed aspects, challenges, and alternatives. Medical Princ Pract 2021; 30(2):109–21. https://doi.org/10.1159/000511002
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Type 2 diabetes in adults Quality standard [QS209]. 2023. www.nice.org.uk
NHS England Digital. National Diabetes Audit 2021-22, Report 1: care processes and treatment targets, detailed analysis report, 2023. Accessed 12/12/24. https://digital.nhs.uk
Office for Health Improvement & Disparities. Fingertips | Public health data: Diabetes 2024. www.gov.uk
Whicher CA, O’Neill S, Holt RIG. Diabetes in the UK: 2019. Diabet Med 2020;37(2):242–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14225
Hodgson S, Morgan-Harrisskitt J, Hounkpatin H, Stuart B, Dambha-Miller H. Primary care service utilisation and outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a longitudinal cohort analysis. BMJ Open 2022; 12(1):e054654. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054654
Abner S, Gillies CL, Shabnam S, et al. Consultation rates in people with type 2 diabetes with and without vascular complications: a retrospective analysis of 141,328 adults in England. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2022;21(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12933-021-01435-y
Hex N, MacDonald R, Pocock J, et al. Estimation of the direct health and indirect societal costs of diabetes in the UK using a cost of illness model. Diabet Med 2024;41(9):e15326. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.15326
Swaithes L, Paskins Z, Duffy H, et al. Experience of implementing and delivering group consultations in UK general practice: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 2021;71(707):e413–e422. https://doi.org/10.3399/BKGP.2020.0856
NHS England. Group consultations: together, patients are stronger. Accessed 12/12/24. https://digital.nhs.uk
Papoutsi C, Hargreaves D, Hagell A, et al. Implementation and delivery of group consultations for young people with diabetes in socioeconomically deprived, ethnically diverse settings. BMC Medicine 2022;20(1):459. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02654-0
Cooper HC, Booth K, Gill G. Patients’ perspectives on diabetes health care education. Health Educ Res 2003;18(2):191–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/18.2.191
Horigan G, Davies M, Findlay-White F, Chaney D, Coates V. Reasons why patients referred to diabetes education programmes choose not to attend: a systematic review. Diabet Med 2017; 34(1):14–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13120
Odgers-Jewell K, Isenring EA, Thomas R, Reidlinger DP. Group participants' experiences of a patient-directed group-based education program for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. PLoS One 2017;12(5):e0177688. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177688
Seale C, 1955. Researching society and culture. Fourth edition, ed. London, Los Angeles: Sage Publications Ltd; 2017. ISBN 1473947154
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 2006;3:77–101.
Lawal M, Woodman A, Fanghanel J, Ohl M. Barriers to attendance at diabetes education centres: perceptions of education providers. J Diabetes Nursing 2017;21(2):61–66.
NHS England. Good communication with patients waiting for care. 2023. Accessed 12/12/24. https://digital.nhs.uk
Booth A, Cantrell A, Preston L, Chambers D, Goyder E. What is the evidence for the effectiveness, appropriateness and feasibility of group clinics for patients with chronic conditions? A systematic review. Health Services Delivery Research 2015;3(46):1–194. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr03460
Owens KM, Keller S. Exploring workforce confidence and patient experiences: a quantitative analysis. Patient Experience Journal 2018;5(1):97–105. https://doi.org/10.35680/2372-0247.1210
Visram S, Bremner AS, Harrington BE, Hawthorne G. Factors affecting uptake of an education and physical activity programme for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Internat Diab Nursing 2008;5(1):17–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/edn.97
Barken TL, Thygesen E, Söderhamn U. Unlocking the limitations: living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and receiving care through telemedicine—a phenomenological study. J Clin Nurs 2018;27(1-2):132–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13857
Vatnøy TK, Thygesen E, Dale B. Telemedicine to support coping resources in home-living patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: patients’ experiences. J Telemed Telecare 2017;23(1):126–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X15626854
Haimi M. The tragic paradoxical effect of telemedicine on healthcare disparities - a time for redemption: a narrative review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2023;23(1):95. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02194-4
Coates V, Slevin M, Carey M, Slater P, Davies M. Declining structured diabetes education in those with type 2 diabetes: a plethora of individual and organisational reasons. Patient Educ Couns 2018;101(4):696–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.10.013
Coningsby I, Ainsworth B, Dack C. A qualitative study exploring the barriers to attending structured education programmes among adults with type 2 diabetes. BMC Health Serv Res 2022;22(1):584. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07980-w
Homer C, Kinsella K, Brown T, et al. “Trying to make healthy choices”: the challenges of the food reintroduction phase of the NHS Low Calorie Diet Programme pilot for type 2 diabetes. Br J Diabetes 2024;24(1):67–73. https://doi.org/10.15277/bjd.2024.436
Davis J, Fischl AH, Beck J, et al. 2022 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support. Diabetes Care 2022;45(2):484–94. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-2396
van Diggele C, Burgess A, Mellis C. Planning, preparing and structuring a small group teaching session. BMC Med Educ 2020; 20(2):462. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02281-4
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 British Journal of Diabetes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Manuscripts published in the June 2024 edition and after in the BJD have been published in open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and available at https://www.bjd-abcd.com. Prior year articles are available free of charge via our website.
