PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare selected diabetes care processes and outcomes of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians (MDs) in the primary care of adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS:Adults with type 2 diabetes and no regular source of primary care were enrolled from the emergency room and randomized to an NP or MD practice. Chart reviews were conducted to assess processes of care; patient interviews and hemoglobin A1C (A1C) testing were performed to measure patient outcomes. RESULTS: NPs were more likely than MDs to document provision of general diabetes education and education about nutrition, weight, exercise, and medications. They were more likely to document patient height, urinalyses results, and A1C values. No differences were found in documenting current medications; alcohol, illicit drug, or tobacco use; depression; weight and blood pressure; foot and cardiovascular exams; blood glucose and creatinine testing; or referral to ophthalmologists. No differences were found in patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence of interdisciplinary differences in the processes of care employed by primary care NPs and MDs in caring for patients with type 2 diabetes. NPs documented the provision of diabetes education and selected monitoring tests more frequently than MDs; however, these differences were not reflected in 6-month patient outcomes.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare selected diabetes care processes and outcomes of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians (MDs) in the primary care of adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Adults with type 2 diabetes and no regular source of primary care were enrolled from the emergency room and randomized to an NP or MD practice. Chart reviews were conducted to assess processes of care; patient interviews and hemoglobin A1C (A1C) testing were performed to measure patient outcomes. RESULTS: NPs were more likely than MDs to document provision of general diabetes education and education about nutrition, weight, exercise, and medications. They were more likely to document patient height, urinalyses results, and A1C values. No differences were found in documenting current medications; alcohol, illicit drug, or tobacco use; depression; weight and blood pressure; foot and cardiovascular exams; blood glucose and creatinine testing; or referral to ophthalmologists. No differences were found in patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence of interdisciplinary differences in the processes of care employed by primary care NPs and MDs in caring for patients with type 2 diabetes. NPs documented the provision of diabetes education and selected monitoring tests more frequently than MDs; however, these differences were not reflected in 6-month patient outcomes.
Authors: Yong-Fang Kuo; James S Goodwin; Nai-Wei Chen; Kyaw K Lwin; Jacques Baillargeon; Mukaila A Raji Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Salim S Virani; Thomas M Maddox; Paul S Chan; Fengming Tang; Julia M Akeroyd; Samantha A Risch; William J Oetgen; Anita Deswal; Biykem Bozkurt; Christie M Ballantyne; Laura A Petersen Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Yihan Yang; Qi Long; Sandra L Jackson; Mary K Rhee; Anne Tomolo; Darin Olson; Lawrence S Phillips Journal: Am J Med Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Pamela A Ohman-Strickland; A John Orzano; Shawna V Hudson; Leif I Solberg; Barbara DiCiccio-Bloom; Dena O'Malley; Alfred F Tallia; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Benjamin F Crabtree Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2008 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Chuan-Fen Liu; Paul L Hebert; Jamie H Douglas; Emily L Neely; Christine A Sulc; Ashok Reddy; Anne E Sales; Edwin S Wong Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 3.402