BACKGROUND: Although specialty care has been shown to improve short-term outcomes in patients hospitalised with acute medical conditions, its effect on patients with chronic conditions treated in the ambulatory care setting is less clear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether specialty care (ie, consultative care provided by an endocrinologist or a general internist in concert with a patient's primary care doctor) within the first year of diagnosis is associated with improved outcomes after the first year for adults with diabetes mellitus treated as outpatients. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study using linked administrative data. SETTING: The province of Saskatchewan, Canada. SAMPLE: 24 232 adults newly diagnosed with diabetes mellitus between 1991 and 2001. METHOD: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Analyses used multivariate Cox proportional hazards models with time-dependent covariates, propensity scores and case mix variables (demographic, disease severity and comorbidities). In addition, restriction analyses examined the effect of specialist care in low-risk subgroups. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 61 years, and over a mean follow-up of 4.9 years 2932 (12%) died. Patients receiving specialty care were younger, had a greater burden of comorbidities, and visited doctors more often before and after their diabetes diagnosis (all p< or =0.001). Compared with patients seen by primary care doctors alone, patients seen by specialists and primary care doctors were more likely to receive recommended treatments (all p< or =0.001), but were more likely to die (13.1% v 11.7%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.27). This association persisted even in patients without comorbidities or target organ damage (adjusted HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.34). CONCLUSION: Specialty care was associated with better disease-specific process measures but not improved survival in adults with diabetes cared for in ambulatory care settings.
BACKGROUND: Although specialty care has been shown to improve short-term outcomes in patients hospitalised with acute medical conditions, its effect on patients with chronic conditions treated in the ambulatory care setting is less clear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether specialty care (ie, consultative care provided by an endocrinologist or a general internist in concert with a patient's primary care doctor) within the first year of diagnosis is associated with improved outcomes after the first year for adults with diabetes mellitus treated as outpatients. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study using linked administrative data. SETTING: The province of Saskatchewan, Canada. SAMPLE: 24 232 adults newly diagnosed with diabetes mellitus between 1991 and 2001. METHOD: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Analyses used multivariate Cox proportional hazards models with time-dependent covariates, propensity scores and case mix variables (demographic, disease severity and comorbidities). In addition, restriction analyses examined the effect of specialist care in low-risk subgroups. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 61 years, and over a mean follow-up of 4.9 years 2932 (12%) died. Patients receiving specialty care were younger, had a greater burden of comorbidities, and visited doctors more often before and after their diabetes diagnosis (all p< or =0.001). Compared with patients seen by primary care doctors alone, patients seen by specialists and primary care doctors were more likely to receive recommended treatments (all p< or =0.001), but were more likely to die (13.1% v 11.7%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.27). This association persisted even in patients without comorbidities or target organ damage (adjusted HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.34). CONCLUSION: Specialty care was associated with better disease-specific process measures but not improved survival in adults with diabetes cared for in ambulatory care settings.
Authors: Sheldon Greenfield; Sherrie H Kaplan; Richard Kahn; John Ninomiya; John L Griffith Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-01-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Laura Homa; Johnie Rose; Peter S Hovmand; Sarah T Cherng; Rick L Riolo; Alison Kraus; Anindita Biswas; Kelly Burgess; Heide Aungst; Kurt C Stange; Kalanthe Brown; Margaret Brooks-Terry; Ellen Dec; Brigid Jackson; Jules Gilliam; George E Kikano; Ann Reichsman; Debbie Schaadt; Jamie Hilfer; Christine Ticknor; Carl V Tyler; Anna Van der Meulen; Heather Ways; Richard F Weinberger; Christine Williams Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Sanjeev N Mehta; Allison B Goldfine; Martin J Abrahamson; William McMullen; Lori M B Laffel Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Jessica D Bellinger; Rahnuma M Hassan; Patrick A Rivers; Qiang Cheng; Edith Williams; Saundra H Glover Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2010-03-10 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Carlo Giorda; Roberta Picariello; Elisa Nada; Barbara Tartaglino; Lisa Marafetti; Giuseppe Costa; Roberto Gnavi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Roberto Gnavi; Roberta Picariello; Ludmi la Karaghiosoff; Giuseppe Costa; Carlo Giorda Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-08-12 Impact factor: 17.152