IPA of the perceptions of diabetes-related complications in DFU
Research type
Research Study
Full title
“An Interpretive phenomenological analysis of the perceptions of diabetes-related complications in those with diabetic foot ulceration”
IRAS ID
146626
Contact name
Claire James
Contact email
Research summary
Background: Those with diabetic foot ulceration DFU have a higher mortality rate than people who have diabetes in the absence of a foot ulcer (Boyko et al, 1996; Moulik et al, 2003). Studies to examine the perceptions of people with DFU of precipitating factors leading to ulceration and, in some cases, amputation have cited lack of understanding of the effects of diabetes, poor self-care and self-management, and failure to seek timely treatment for foot-related issues as reasons for development of DFU and subsequent amputations (Feinglass et al, 2012; Gale et al, 2008). Multidisciplinary approach to managing DFU is recommended by SIGN 116 underpinned by high quality cohort studies with a low risk of bias and a high chance of causality (Krishnan et al, 2008; Larsson et al, 1995; Albreksten et al, 1997; Faglia et al, 1998; Rith-Najarian et al, 1998). People affected by DFU often have multiple, progressive diabetes-related complications (Williams & Pickup, 2004). It is for this reason that the research proposed will purposively sample from those attending multi-disciplinary diabetic foot clinics in NHS Lanarkshires three acute hospital sites.
No literature could be found that examined the perceptions and experiences of diabetes-related complications specifically in those with DFU. There is therefore a gap in the current knowledge.
Aims and Objectives:
Aim
The aim of this study is to explore the perceptions of individuals with DFU of diabetes-related complications.Objectives
1) To explore participants’ understanding of their diabetes-related complications.
2) To explore participants’ experience of diabetes-related complications.
3) To explore how the participants conceptualise these complications and how they came to have them.Methods: IPA (Smith, 1996) has been selected in order to “make sense of the participants making sense of their experience”. This approach calls for a sample size between 1 and 6 due to the time required to collect and analyse data (Smith et al,2009). It is proposed that the study will enroll 6 participants in order to increase the likelihood of explaining and interpreting the participants lived experience. This should serve to satisfy Lincoln & Gubas (1985) framework for trustworthiness in qualitative research. Participants will be given written information on the aims and objectives of the study, as well as what is expected of them. They will then give written informed consent, but be free to withdraw from the process at any time. Participants will be interviewed using semi-structured interviews to allow for consistency and further exploration of any emerging themes. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. Analysis will be carried out on a case-by-case basis using the six steps recommended by Smith et al (2009). The ultimate aim is to gain insight into the perceptions of this group and better inform clinical practice as a result of the findings
REC name
South West - Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/SW/1072
Date of REC Opinion
21 Aug 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion