PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to pilot-test the feasibility and impact of protocol-driven point-of-care HbAlc testing on levels of glycemic control and on rates of diabetic regimen intensification in an urban community health center serving low-income patients. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The paper suggests a primary care process re-design, using point of care finger-stick HbA1c testing under a standing order protocol that provided test results to the provider at patient visit. FINDINGS: The paper finds that the protocol was well received by both nurses and physicians. HbA1c testing rates increased from 73.6 percent to 86.8 percent (p = 0.40, n = 106). For the 69 patients who had both pre- and post-intervention results, HbAlc levels decreased significantly from 8.55 to 7.84 (p = 0.004, n = 69). At baseline, the health center as a system was relatively ineffective in responding to elevated HbA1c levels. An opportunity to intensify, i.e. a face-to-face visit with lab results available, occurred for only 68.6 percent of elevated HbAlc levels before the intervention, vs. 100 percent post-intervention (p < 0.001). Only 28.6 percent of patients with HbAlc levels >8.0 had their regimens intensified in the pre-intervention phase, compared with 53.8 percent in the post-intervention phase (p = 0.03). RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This was a pilot-study in one urban health center. Larger group-randomized controlled trials are needed. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The health center's performance as a system, improved significantly as a way of intensifying diabetic regimens thereby achieving improved glycemic control. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This intervention is feasible, replicable and scalable and does not rely on changing physician behaviors to improve primary care diabetic outcomes.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to pilot-test the feasibility and impact of protocol-driven point-of-care HbAlc testing on levels of glycemic control and on rates of diabetic regimen intensification in an urban community health center serving low-income patients. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The paper suggests a primary care process re-design, using point of care finger-stick HbA1c testing under a standing order protocol that provided test results to the provider at patient visit. FINDINGS: The paper finds that the protocol was well received by both nurses and physicians. HbA1c testing rates increased from 73.6 percent to 86.8 percent (p = 0.40, n = 106). For the 69 patients who had both pre- and post-intervention results, HbAlc levels decreased significantly from 8.55 to 7.84 (p = 0.004, n = 69). At baseline, the health center as a system was relatively ineffective in responding to elevated HbA1c levels. An opportunity to intensify, i.e. a face-to-face visit with lab results available, occurred for only 68.6 percent of elevated HbAlc levels before the intervention, vs. 100 percent post-intervention (p < 0.001). Only 28.6 percent of patients with HbAlc levels >8.0 had their regimens intensified in the pre-intervention phase, compared with 53.8 percent in the post-intervention phase (p = 0.03). RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This was a pilot-study in one urban health center. Larger group-randomized controlled trials are needed. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The health center's performance as a system, improved significantly as a way of intensifying diabetic regimens thereby achieving improved glycemic control. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This intervention is feasible, replicable and scalable and does not rely on changing physician behaviors to improve primary care diabetic outcomes.
Authors: L S Phillips; W T Branch; C B Cook; J P Doyle; I M El-Kebbi; D L Gallina; C D Miller; D C Ziemer; C S Barnes Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-11-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Erin G Stone; Sally C Morton; Marlies E Hulscher; Margaret A Maglione; Elizabeth A Roth; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Brian S Mittman; Lisa V Rubenstein; Laurence Z Rubenstein; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Jinan B Saaddine; Michael M Engelgau; Gloria L Beckles; Edward W Gregg; Theodore J Thompson; K M Venkat Narayan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-04-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Andrew J Karter; Assiamira Ferrara; Jennifer Y Liu; Howard H Moffet; Lynn M Ackerson; Joe V Selby Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-05-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: M Belfiglio; G De Berardis; M Franciosi; D Cavaliere; B Di Nardo; S Greenfield; S H Kaplan; F Pellegrini; M Sacco; G Tognoni; M Valentini; A Nicolucci; V Caimi; F Capani; A Corsi; R Della Vedova; M Massi Benedetti; A Nicolucci; C Taboga; M Tombesi; G Vespasiani Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: David C Ziemer; Christopher D Miller; Mary K Rhee; Joyce P Doyle; Clyde Watkins; Curtiss B Cook; Daniel L Gallina; Imad M El-Kebbi; Catherine S Barnes; Virginia G Dunbar; William T Branch; Lawrence S Phillips Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.140