Abstract
Background
Clinicians’ behaviours require deliberate decision-making in complex contexts and may involve both impulsive (automatic) and reflective (motivational and volitional) processes.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to test a dual process model applied to clinician behaviours in their management of type 2 diabetes.
Methods
The design used six nested prospective correlational studies. Questionnaires were sent to general practitioners and nurses in 99 UK primary care practices, measuring reflective (intention, action planning and coping planning) and impulsive (automaticity) predictors for six guideline-recommended behaviours: blood pressure prescribing (N = 335), prescribing for glycemic control (N = 288), providing diabetes-related education (N = 346), providing weight advice (N = 417), providing self-management advice (N = 332) and examining the feet (N = 218).
Results
Respondent retention was high. A dual process model was supported for prescribing behaviours, weight advice, and examining the feet. A sequential reflective process was supported for blood pressure prescribing, self-management and weight advice, and diabetes-related education.
Conclusions
Reflective and impulsive processes predict behaviour. Quality improvement interventions should consider both reflective and impulsive approaches to behaviour change.
Clinicians’ behaviours require deliberate decision-making in complex contexts and may involve both impulsive (automatic) and reflective (motivational and volitional) processes.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to test a dual process model applied to clinician behaviours in their management of type 2 diabetes.
Methods
The design used six nested prospective correlational studies. Questionnaires were sent to general practitioners and nurses in 99 UK primary care practices, measuring reflective (intention, action planning and coping planning) and impulsive (automaticity) predictors for six guideline-recommended behaviours: blood pressure prescribing (N = 335), prescribing for glycemic control (N = 288), providing diabetes-related education (N = 346), providing weight advice (N = 417), providing self-management advice (N = 332) and examining the feet (N = 218).
Results
Respondent retention was high. A dual process model was supported for prescribing behaviours, weight advice, and examining the feet. A sequential reflective process was supported for blood pressure prescribing, self-management and weight advice, and diabetes-related education.
Conclusions
Reflective and impulsive processes predict behaviour. Quality improvement interventions should consider both reflective and impulsive approaches to behaviour change.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 48 |
| Pages (from-to) | 347-358 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Annals of Behavioral Medicine |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Early online date | 20 Mar 2014 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2014 |
Keywords
- clinician behaviour
- dual process
- diabetes
- motivation
- volition
- automaticity
Access to Document
- Presseau ABM 2014
The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12160-014-9609-8