No abstract

A high proportion of insulin-treated patients experience hypoglycemia resulting in fear of hypoglycemia and changes in self-care behavior that may compromise glycemic control. Many patients with a history of severe hypoglycemia consider underreporting hypoglycemic events through concern over retaining their driving license.

Aim: To identify a minimal set of patient-reported (PRO) domains for use in value-based diabetes care in Denmark. Methodology: A structured mixed-methods research protocol was applied to ensure an evidence-based approach to involvement of people with diabetes in the identification of patient-centered outcome domains. 20 people with diabetes and 4 caregivers of people with diabetes selected for representativeness in age, gender, type of therapy, duration of diabetes, type of diabetes, and disease burden were recruited for qualitative research and co-creation to examine 1) psychological, physical and social impacts of diabetes and desired outcomes of treatment, 2) dis-utilities of therapy and 3) factors enabling sustainability in line with the value based care model. Qualitative research based on interviews, structured focus group and co-creation workshop sessions together with desk research on patient, clinical, health economic, and societal relevance of identified domains informed the final identification of domains by a multi-disciplinary and multi-sector working group using strict criteria of patient importance, clinical relevance and applicability, measurability and mutability. Results: The following PRO domains were selected to complement the clinical outcome domains: Self-reported health, psychological well-being, symptom burden (e.g., sleep, sexual dysfunction, complications), multi-faceted impact of diabetes on life including diabetes distress, treatment burden and impacts of hypoglycemia, and specific indicators of care confidence, quality and diabetes self-care ability. Conclusions: The assessment of patient-important outcomes for value based diabetes care in Denmark require the implementation of PRO questionnaires in standard diabetes care. Disclosure S.E. Skovlund: None. L. Troelsen: None. M. Dømgaard: None. P.O. Jakobsen: None. N. Ejskjaer: None.

Background: A major barrier to adequate headache care is lacking formal education and training of healthcare professionals. Concerted efforts should be made to pinpoint major gaps in knowledge in healthcare professionals to facilitate better educational policies in headache training. The aim of this study was to identify deficiencies and barriers in headache training among residents in neurology in Denmark.Methods: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of residents in neurology in Denmark from April 2019 to September 2019. The survey included questions on participant demographics, knowledge of and barriers in headache disorders, guidelines and diagnostic tools usage, contact with primary and tertiary care, medication overuse, and non-pharmacological interventions.Results: Sixty residents across Denmark accepted the invitation and 54/60 (90%) completed the survey. Although two-thirds, 35/54 (65%), of the population had prior formalized training in headache disorders, we identified gaps in all explored domains including diagnosis, management, and referral patterns. Particularly, there was an inconsistent use of guidelines and diagnostic criteria from the Danish Headache Society (2.74 (±1.14)), the Danish Neurological Society (3.15 (±0.86)), and the International Classification of Headache Disorders (2.33 (±1.08)); 1: never/have not heard of, 4: always. Headache was ranked second to last out of six sub-specializations in popularity.Conclusions: Overall knowledge on headache disorders amongst neurology residents in Denmark do not meet the expectations set out by national and international recommendations. Stakeholders should make strategic initiatives for structured education in headache for improved clinical outcomes in parallel with costs reduction through resource optimization.