CFP
HOME HELP CONTACT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Can Fam Physician
Vol. 53, No. 1, January 2007, pp.73 - 77
Copyright © 2007 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Résumé
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in CFP
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lin, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirby, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lin, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirby, E.

Clinical Review

Improving diabetes management

Structured clinic program for Canadian primary care

Daren Lin
Medical student in the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry at the University of Western Ontario in London

Shirley Hale, RN(EC)
Nurse practitioner at the Wawa Medical Centre in Wawa, Ont

Erle Kirby, MD, MSC, FCFP
General practitioner at the Wawa Medical Centre and an Associate Professor at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont

Correspondence to: Dr Erle Kirby, Wawa Medical Centre, 17 Government Rd, Wawa, ON P0S 1K0; telephone 705 856-1313; fax 705 856-1330; e-mail erlkirby{at}xplornet.com

Diabetes mellitus, a chronic disease that affects up to 1.4 million Canadians, causes substantial morbidity and mortality.1 Effective management of patients with diabetes can reduce the complications associated with the disease.2,3 Current guidelines for optimal management of these patients require a multi-disciplinary approach in which family physicians are the main team members responsible for coordinating proper, timely care.2,3 In busy primary care practices, it is often difficult to adhere to these guidelines, but this might be because there is no organized approach to care.4–6 In Canada, primary care practitioners are the sole care providers for most patients with diabetes (77%), and these physicians have a low rate of adherence to clinical guidelines for treating diabetes.7

Many interventions have been used in efforts to enhance physicians’ adherence to recommendations for diabetes care and, therefore, to improve patient outcomes. These interventions have included steering committees; dedicated diabetic clinics; education for care providers; patient education and self-management tactics; nutrition counseling; use of nurses following protocols; computerized monitoring and planning; redesigned office systems; cluster visits involving case managers, psychologists, nutritionists, pharmacists, and physician specialists; physician audits; performance incentives; and use of flow sheets.8–23 Such interventions have sometimes improved the process of care, patient outcomes, or both.24,25

A systematic review of 41 papers on quality of diabetic outpatient care found that multifaceted interventions targeted at physicians and organizational changes improved diabetic management, while patient-oriented interventions led to better patient outcomes.24 Unfortunately, many of the interventions studied are not readily accessible to typical Canadian primary caregivers who manage patients with diabetes. For instance, several studies were conducted in health maintenance organizations that had access to independent performance incentives, case managers, steering committees, and on-site specialists.19,20,23

The purpose of our program was to introduce simple, accessible interventions to improve adherence to clinical guidelines in a Canadian primary care setting with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes. Our clinic, a primary care centre staffed by 5 general practitioners and a nurse practitioner, services Wawa, Ont, a town of 3700 in northwestern Ontario with a catchment population of 6500. Wawa is 230 km away from the nearest referral centre. Before we initiated this program, diabetic patients in our clinic were seen about every 3 months for 15-minute appointments and treated according to current diabetes guidelines.2 There was no system in place to remind patients of their appointments. Blood tests were usually scheduled at 3-month intervals, but the results of tests were sometimes not available at the time of patients’ next visits. Patients often attended their appointments without bringing their medications or their diabetic logbooks.

Program description

The program was implemented by a doctor and a nurse practitioner for their existing patients. The appointment load was divided evenly between these 2 primary care-givers. The program used 3 interventions previously described in the literature for improving quality of care. First, every 3 months, patients were given 30-minute appointments rather than the default 15-minute appointments normally given. Second, before each diabetes clinic day, a secretary telephoned each of the scheduled patients to remind them of their appointments, to remind them to bring all their medications and logbooks to the appointment, and to arrange for their routine blood work about 1 week before the appointment so that results would be available at the time of the visit. Third, a standardized diabetic flow sheet that followed the Canadian Diabetes Association’s guidelines for care was used to record information on each patient.26

A research associate used a historical cohort design to compare management of diabetic patients in the more structured program (intervention group) with patients treated in the usual fashion (reference group). Power analysis showed that a sample size of 27 patients per group was needed to detect a difference levels with 95% of 0.5% between the 2 groups in HbAIc confidence and a standard deviation of 0.5% at a .05 level of significance. A total of 37 patients participated in the diabetes clinic program between July 18, 2001, and July 19, 2004. The reference group was of similar size and was randomly drawn from a computerized list of diabetes patients of doctors who did not use the more structured program. This process excluded patients who did not have family doctors. Patients in the reference group were treated according to current diabetes guidelines. The only difference between their management and that of the intervention group was that their management excluded the 3 program interventions. A chart review was conducted to compare the 2 groups of patients during this 3-year period by recording their demographic information, blood pressure, weight, blood biochemistry, prescribed medications, referrals, and immunizations. In both groups, patients who did not have at least 2 diabetic follow-up appointments during the study period were excluded from the analysis.

We had sufficient data for analysis for 33 of the 37 patients in the intervention group and 35 of the 45 patients in the reference group. There was no significant difference between groups in demographic characteristics, follow-up time, baseline laboratory results, and medication use (Table 1).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Characteristics were not significantly different between groups.

 
Improvements seen after implementation of the program

In the intervention group, HbAIc and low-density lipo-protein levels and the ratio of total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein decreased significantly, but did not do so in the reference group (Table 2). Weights and blood pressures did not change significantly in either group. None of the values shown in Table 2 differed significantly between groups at the start of the study or after the follow-up period.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Markers improved significantly only in patients in the intervention group.

 
Consistent with diabetes care guidelines, acetylsalicylic acid use increased significantly (P <.01) in patients older than 40 in the intervention group (Table 3). Referrals to ophthalmologists were significantly (P <.01) more frequent in the intervention group (Table 4). The number of pneumonia and influenza vaccinations was not significantly different between groups (Table 4). Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers by patients with microalbuminuria was not significantly more frequent in the intervention group.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3 Use increased significantly among those older than 40 only in the intervention group.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4 Vaccinations were not significantly more up-to-date among those in the intervention group, although a trend was seen with pneumonia vaccinations. Ophthalmology referrals were significantly more up-to-date only among patients in the intervention group.

 
Discussion

The purpose of our program was to improve caregivers’ adherence to guidelines and diabetic patients’ outcomes through 3 simple interventions: 30-minute appointments, reminder telephone calls, and use of flow sheets. We think our program improved on previous programs by using interventions that were simple to implement in our primary care setting and by avoiding interventions that required many resources or substantial organizational changes. Evaluation of our program using a historical cohort design found that the interventions resulted in improvement in caregivers’ adherence to certain guidelines and in some physiologic parameters of diabetic patients. Patients treated according to the same guidelines without these simple interventions did not improve significantly during the study period.

A systematic review found that organizational and physician interventions could improve physicians’ adherence to guidelines, while patient-oriented interventions could improve patient outcomes.24 Our 3 interventions seem to have improved physicians’ adherence and patients’ outcomes. Longer counseling sessions might have provided enough time for physicians to encourage lifestyle changes effectively and to manage these complex chronic cases adequately. Telephone reminders might have improved the regularity of follow-up and laboratory tests. Flow sheets might have served as reminders and records specific to the complexities of diabetic treatment. Also, reserving an entire day for diabetes care might have increased caregiver efficiency and patient motivation by focusing attention on a particular area of patient health.

Despite statistically significant improvements, even in this small cohort, by the end of the follow-up period, the intervention group had not quite reached guideline target levels of ≤7% for HbAIc, ≤2.5 mmol/L for low-density lipoprotein, and ≤4.0 mmol/L for the ratio of total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein or 100% physician adherence. Reasons for this could be insufficient length of follow-up time or a need for additional interventions in the program. Results of this study, however, were still encouraging. For instance, the 0.61% ± 0.15% decrease in HbAIc levels in the intervention group is similar to the decrease expected when one of several antihyperglycemic agents, such as acarbose, nateglinide, or orlistat, is added to patients’ medication regimens.2

Results of our program evaluation were comparable to those of similar studies, although many of these studies were larger and more complex. An outpatient study of 144 patients by Benjamin et al,27 using physician education combined with audit and feedback, showed that HbAIc levels improved by 0.62% ± 0.3% over 15 months to 8.68%, a significant difference, but also above target. These authors found that annual dilated retinal examinations increased from 32% to 63% of patients and annual influenza vaccinations increased from 30% to 73% of patients. Peters and Davidson23 presented a health maintenance organization model, including educational materials, audit and feedback, organizational changes, and follow-up arrangements. Their results showed a decrease in HbAIc levels from 11.9% to 8.6%, a larger absolute improvement than in our program, but also above the guideline target. Overall cholesterol levels did not change between groups in that study. We are aware of only 2 programs beside ours that resulted in decreases in total cholesterol through improvement in quality of care.28,29 Neither of these programs led to improvement in total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein ratios as ours did. Many studies found no improvement in weight or blood pressure,30,31 although some did.32

Two primary caregivers participated in the diabetes clinic days, a physician and a nurse practitioner. Although most similar programs used nurses or nurse practitioners as assistants, the nurse practitioner at our clinic independently managed an equal share of the diabetes patients in our program and had the same role as the physician. We think the outcomes indicate that these results could be achieved equally well by either physicians or nurse practitioners working alone and do not suggest that both are needed to achieve the desired outcomes.

Limitations

Since the physician and nurse practitioner involved in the program enrolled only their existing patients at the time of program implementation, prospective randomization between intervention and reference groups did not occur. This created a selection bias, although the known characteristics of both groups were similar at baseline. Performance bias might have had a role, as the study was not blinded. A research associate, who was not involved in implementation of the program, conducted the evaluation independently to avoid detection bias during data collection.

Improvements to the program

To further improve our program, we plan to involve a diabetes educator during our structured diabetes clinic days. Patients will meet for group sessions with the educator either before or after their appointments. The session will allow patients to discuss common issues, such as diet and exercise, that might still need to be more completely addressed after clinic appointments. Holding these sessions on the same day as the diabetes clinic would improve access for our patients who will then not have to make a separate trip to attend the sessions.

Conclusion

Most diabetes care in Canada occurs at the primary care level where physicians’ adherence to guidelines is often poor.7 Much evidence supports quality-improvement interventions for diabetes management to increase physicians’ adherence to guidelines and to improve patient outcomes.24 Our program used 3 interventions that could easily be used in most Canadian primary care practices: 30-minute appointments, reminder telephone calls, and flow sheets. During a 3-year period, these interventions appeared to improve some of patients’ physiologic parameters and primary caregivers’ adherence to guidelines. A similar approach, using our interventions or other interventions cited in the literature, can be used by interested physicians or nurse practitioners to enhance the quality of their care of patients with diabetes.


EDITOR’S KEY POINTS

  • Many interventions have been used in efforts to enhance physicians’ adherence to recommendations for care of diabetic patients and to improve patient outcomes. Unfortunately, many of these interventions are not readily accessible to typical Canadian primary caregivers.
  • This program introduced 3 simple, accessible interventions to improve adherence to clinical guidelines with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes. The interventions were 30-minute appointments, reminder telephone calls, and use of flow sheets.
  • During a 3-year period, these interventions improved several physiologic parameters in patients as well as primary caregivers’ adherence to guidelines. These improvements were in comparison with the outcomes of patients treated using the usual less structured approach.

 

Acknowledgments

At the time of the study, Mr Lin was on a clinical elective supported by the Northwestern Ontario Medical Programme.

Footnotes

This article has been peer reviewed.

References

  1. Health Canada. Diabetes in Canada: national statistics and opportunities for improved surveillance, prevention, and control. Ottawa, Ont: Health Canada; 1999. Catalogue no. H49-121/1999.
  2. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee. Canadian Diabetes Association 2003 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2003;27(Suppl_2):S1-151.
  3. Mensing C, Boucher J, Cypress M, Weinger K, Mulcahey K, Barta P, et al. National standards for diabetes self-management education. American Diabetes Association: clinical practice recommendations 2001. Diabetes Care 2001;24(Suppl 1):S1-133.[Medline]
  4. Ho M, Marger M, Beart J, Yip I, Shekelle P. Is the quality of diabetes care better in a diabetes clinic or in a general medicine clinic? Diabetes Care 1997;20(4):472-5.[Abstract]
  5. Leinung MC, Gianoukakis AG, Lee DW, Jeronis SL, Desemone J. Comparison of diabetes care provided by an endocrinology clinic and a primary-care clinic. Endocrinol Pract 2000;6(5):361-6.
  6. Kirkman MS, Williams SR, Caffrey HH, Marrero DG. Impact of a program to improve adherence to diabetes guidelines by primary care physicians. Diabetes Care 2002;25(11):1946-51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Harris SB, Stewart M, Brown JB, Wetmore S, Faulds C, Webster-Bogaert S, et al. Type 2 diabetes in family practice. Room for improvement. Can Fam Physician 2003;49:778-85.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Fernando DJ, Perera SD. The work of a diabetes clinic: an audit. Ceylon Med J 1994;39(3):138-9.[Medline]
  9. Wagner EH, Grothaus LC, Sandhu N, Galvin MS, McGregor M, Artz K, et al. Chronic care clinics for diabetes in primary care: a system-wide randomized trial. Diabetes Care 2001;24(4):695-700.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Reed RL, Revel AO, Carter A, Saadi HF, Dunn EV. A clinical trial of chronic care diabetic clinics in general practice in the United Arab Emirates: a preliminary analysis. Arch Physiol Biochem 2001;109(3):272-80.[Medline]
  11. Grey N, Maljanian R, Staff I, Cruzmarino de Aponte M. Improving care of diabetic patients through a collaborative care model. Conn Med 2002;66(1):7-11.[Medline]
  12. Montori VM, Dinneen SF, Gorman CA, Zimmerman BR, Rizza RA, Bjornsen SS, et al. The impact of planned care and a diabetes electronic management system on community-based diabetes care: the Mayo Health System Diabetes Translation Project. Diabetes Care 2002;25(11):1952-7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. De Grauw WJ, van Gerwen WH, van de Lisdonk EH, van den Hoogen HJ, van den Bosch WJ, van Weel C. Outcomes of audit-enhanced monitoring of patients with type 2 diabetes. J Fam Pract 2002;51(5):459-64.[Medline]
  14. Schwab J. Diabetes management in a rural clinic setting. Nurs Case Manag 1998;3(5):192-5.[Medline]
  15. Sperl-Hillen J, O’Connor PJ, Carlson RR, Lawson TB, Halstenson C, Crowson T, et al. Improving diabetes care in a large health care system: an enhanced primary care approach. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 2000;26(11):615-22.[Medline]
  16. Stoner KL, Lasar NJ, Butcher MK, Fawcett LM, Danelson ME, Harwell TS, et al. Improving glycemic control: can techniques used in a managed care setting be successfully adapted to a rural fee-for-service practice? Am J Med Qual 2001;16(3):93-8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Sadur CN, Moline N, Costa M, Michalik D, Mendlowitz D, Roller S, et al. Diabetes management in a health maintenance organization. Efficacy of care management using cluster visits. Diabetes Care 1999;22(12):2011-7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Kirkman MS, Williams SR, Caffrey HH, Marrero DG. Impact of a program to improve adherence to diabetes guidelines by primary care physicians. Diabetes Care 2002;25(11):1946-51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Sidorov J, Gabbay R, Harris R, Shull RD, Girolami S, Tomcavage J, et al. Disease management for diabetes mellitus: impact on hemoglobin A1c. Am J Manag Care 2000;6(11):1217-26.[Medline]
  20. Renders CM, Valk GD, Franse LV, Schellevis FG, van Eijk JT, van der Wal G. Long-term effectiveness of a quality improvement program for patients with type 2 diabetes in general practice. Diabetes Care 2001;24(8):1365-70.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Hirsch IB, Goldberg HI, Ellsworth A, Evans TC, Herter CD, Ramsey SD, et al. A multifaceted intervention in support of diabetes treatment guidelines: a cont trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2002;58(1):27-36.[Medline]
  22. Larsen DL, Cannon W, Towner S. Longitudinal assessment of a diabetes care management system in an integrated health network. J Manag Care Pharm 2003;9(6):552-8.[Medline]
  23. Peters AL, Davidson MB. Application of a diabetes managed care program. The feasibility of using nurses and a computer system to provide effective care. Diabetes Care 1998;21(7):1037-43.[Abstract]
  24. Renders CM, Valk GD, Griffin S, Wagner EH, Eijk JT, Assendelft WJ. Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;1:CD001481.[Medline]
  25. Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. The chronic care model, part 2. JAMA 2002;288(15):1909-14.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Chinook Health Region and Alberta Clinical Guideline Program. Diabetes care flow sheet for patients with diabetes. Chinook, Alta: Chinook Health Region; 2004. Available from: http://www.chr.ab.ca/about_chr/graphics/diabetes.pdf. Accessed 2006 September 18.
  27. Benjamin EM, Schneider MS, Hinchey KT. Implementing practice guidelines for diabetes care using problem-based learning. A prospective controlled trial using firm systems. Diabetes Care 1999;22(10):1672-8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Pieber TR, Holler A, Siebenhofer A, Brunner GA, Semlitsch B, Schattenberg S, et al. Evaluation of a structured teaching and treatment programme for type 2 diabetes in general practice in a rural area of Austria. Diabet Med 1995;12(4):349-54.[Medline]
  29. De Sonnaville JJ, Bouma M, Colly LP, Deville W, Wijkel D, Heine RJ. Sustained good glycaemic control in NIDDM patients by implementation of structured care in general practice: 2-year follow-up study. Diabetologia 1997;40(11):1334-40.[Medline]
  30. Aubert RE, Herman HW, Waters J, Moore W, Sutton D, Peterson BL. Nurse case management to improve glycemic control in diabetic patients in a health maintenance organization. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1998;129(8):605-12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Hartmann P, Grusser M, Kronsbein P, Jorgens V. Effects of peer review groups on physicians’ practice. Eur J Gen Pract 1995;1:107-2.
  32. Branger PJ, van’t Hooft A, van der Wouden JC, Moorman PW, van Bemmel JH. Shared care for diabetes: supporting communication between primary and secondary care. Int J Med Inform 1999;53(2–3):133-42.[Medline]

Related articles in CFP:

Exploring uncertainty
Diane Kelsall
CFP 2007 53: 11. [Full Text]  

Explorer l’incertitude
Diane Kelsall
CFP 2007 53: 11. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 cfpHome page
D. Innes, A. Farquhar, D. Cameron, and H. Tildesley
Sweet success
Can Fam Physician, April 1, 2007; 53(4): 624 - 625.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Résumé
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in CFP
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lin, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirby, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lin, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirby, E.

HOME HELP CONTACT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES SEARCH