
New Service for
TodaysSeniorsNetwork.com readers...roll mouse over, click on
highlighted links in stories to review items from Amazon
Quality-Improvement initiatives lead to
progress in Diabetes care
Newswise — Two major
initiatives designed to improve primary care
treatment of type 2 diabetes have yielded
significant benefits in largely minority,
disadvantaged populations, according to a
pair of studies in the December issue of
Medical Care, published by Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins, a part of Wolters Kluwer
Health, a leading provider of information
and business intelligence for students,
professionals, and institutions in medicine,
nursing, allied health, pharmacy and the
pharmaceutical industry.
One study finds that
patients treated at clinics that follow the
"Chronic Care Model" have lower rates of
diabetes-related coronary artery disease,
while another finds that the "Health
Disparities Collaboratives" initiative has
improved diabetes care at U.S. community
health centers.
In both studies,
outcomes appeared better when care more
closely followed the research-based quality
improvement programs. "Patients are better
off when we use what we know; the more
reliably we use it, the better off they
are," writes Dr. Donald M. Berwick of the
Institute for Healthcare Improvement,
Cambridge, Mass., in an accompanying
editorial. "That's the simple, affirming
conclusion of both of these papers."
Dr. Michael Parchman
and colleagues of the South Texas Veterans
Health Care System, San Antonio, evaluated
an approach called the Chronic Care Model (CCM),
which outlines specific organizational
characteristics believed to lead to improved
outcomes for patients with chronic diseases
such as type 2 diabetes. Using data on
diabetic patients treated at twenty Texas
primary care clinics, the researchers looked
at how closely diabetes care followed the
CCM approach, and whether CCM care led to
reductions in the risk of coronary heart
disease—a major complication of diabetes.
Just fifteen percent of
patients in the study met target levels for
three critical risk factors: hemoglobin A1c
(which measures long-term control of blood
sugar levels), blood pressure, and lipid
levels (including cholesterol). The overall
coronary risk over 10 years was 16.2
percent—nearly one-third of this risk (5.0
percent) could be explained by poor control
of risk factors.
At clinics that
followed the CCM approach more closely, the
percentage of CHD risk explained by poor
risk factor control was significantly
reduced. For example, at a clinic that
closely followed the CCM, just 1.7 percent
of CHD risk was explained by poor risk
factor control, compared to 5.0 percent at a
clinic that only partially followed the CCM
approach. "These findings contribute to the
growing body of evidence documenting a
relationship between how care is provided in
primary care clinic settings and patient
outcomes," Dr. Parchman and colleagues
conclude.
The second study, led
by Dr Marshall H. Chin of University of
Chicago, evaluated the impact of a Health
Resources and Services Administration
initiative, the Health Disparities
Collaborative (HDC). The goal of the HDC was
to institute a quality improvement program
for diabetes care for patients treated at
community health centers.
Using nationwide data,
the researchers found that health centers
where staff were trained in the HDC approach
achieved significant improvements in several
measures of diabetes care, including
reductions in hemoglobin A1c level and "bad"
cholesterol levels. Centers receiving a more
intensive form of the HDC approach had only
slightly better improvement. It may be that
the "standard" HDC approach is adequate, or
that even stronger interventions will be
needed to achieve greater improvements.
New approaches to
improving care for patients with chronic
diseases such as diabetes are urgently
needed—particularly in medically
"under-served" populations at increased risk
of poor health outcomes. However, it can be
difficult to translate research-proven
management approaches into "real-world"
health care settings.
The new studies show
that research-based initiatives such as CCM
and HDC can improve diabetes care for
disadvantaged populations, at both the
patient and organizational levels. Dr.
Berwick writes, "Both papers seek to build a
bridge between two important worlds of
endeavor: the world of study and assessment
of medical practices, and the world of
action to put that knowledge to work on
behalf of patients."
About Medical Care
Rated as one of the top ten journals in
healthcare administration, Medical Care is
devoted to all aspects of the administration
and delivery of healthcare. This scholarly
journal publishes original, peer-reviewed
papers documenting the most current
developments in the rapidly changing field
of healthcare. Medical Care provides timely
reports on the findings of original
investigations into issues related to the
research, planning, organization, financing,
provision, and evaluation of health
services. In addition, numerous special
supplementary issues that focus on
specialized topics are produced with each
volume. Medical Care is the official journal
of the Medical Care Section of the American
Public Health Association. Visit the journal
website at
http://www.lww-medicalcare.com.
About Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (http://LWW.com)
is a leading international publisher for
healthcare professionals and students with
nearly 300 periodicals and 1,500 books in
more than 100 disciplines publishing under
the LWW brand, as well as content-based
sites and online corporate and customer
services. LWW is part of Wolters Kluwer
Health, a leading provider of information
and business intelligence for students,
professionals and institutions in medicine,
nursing, allied health, pharmacy and the
pharmaceutical industry. Wolters Kluwer
Health is a division of Wolters Kluwer, a
leading global information services and
publishing company with annual revenues
(2006) of €3.4 billion and approximately
18,450 employees worldwide. Visit
http://WoltersKluwer.com.
...
...
...