[Construction of IPA decision model for diabetes prevention and control based on economy and importance]

Objective: To determine the priority of diabetes prevention and control measures in the perspective of the economy and importance, and provide theoretical support for guiding relevant departments to implement measures based on actual economic level. Methods: An online survey was conducted on the importance, feasibility and implementation of major chronic disease prevention and control measures in 488 national demonstration areas for comprehensive chronic disease prevention and control. The content of the survey was divided into individual and group levels, with 10 dimensions and 44 measures, to obtain the scores of the economy and importance. IPA model was used to divide the dimension index of diabetes prevention and control into quadrants. The standardized factor load coefficient of the second-order confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the priority of dimension index in the same quadrant. The priority of prevention and control measures in each dimension was determined by the discriminant parameter of project response theory. Results: The mean scores of economy and importance were 66.50 and 89.94, respectively, and the matrix was divided into four quadrants. The first quadrant was the "highest priority" with high importance and economy, including medical insurance and family doctors, health education, high-risk detection and intervention, patient management and community action. The second quadrant was characterized as high importance but low economy, which was the priority for improvement, including only one dimension of complication screening. The third quadrant was the lowest priority due to low importance and economy, including personal health service evaluation and follow-up, environmental support, diabetes co-infection prevention and glycemic policy. The last quadrant had low importance but high economy, which was the second improvement level. The priority measures in different quadrants were: (1) the highest priority: blood lipid control, occupational site, prevention and control work plan, blood glucose testing, family doctor contract service; (2) the priority improvement: annual neuropathy screening; (3)the lowest priority: universal access to risk scoring, healthy eating, healthy dining innovations and tuberculosis screening. Conclusion: IPA model can be used to construct a decision-making model for diabetes prevention and control and determine the priority of corresponding measures.