AIMS: To evaluate the effect of an electronic feedback system to general practitioners on quality of Type 2 diabetes care. METHODS: A cluster randomized, controlled trial with 15 months follow-up. Eighty-six general practices (158 general practitioners) in a Danish county caring for 2458 people 40-70 years old with Type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive or not to receive electronic feedback on quality of care. People with Type 2 diabetes were identified using a validated algorithm. Primary end-points were processes of care according to guidelines on prescriptions redeemed for Type 2 diabetes treatments, measuring of glycated haemoglobin and cholesterol and visits to ophthalmologists. Secondary end-points were changes in level of glycated haemoglobin and serum cholesterol. Data were analysed using generalized linear models accounting for clustering at practice level. RESULTS: During follow-up, people with Type 2 diabetes in the intervention group more often redeemed recommended prescriptions than people in the control group, respectively, as follows: oral antidiabetic treatment (32.8 vs. 12.0%, P =0.002), insulin treatment (33.8 vs. 12.4%, P < 0.001), lipid-lowering medication (38.3 vs. 18.6%, 0.004) and blood pressure medication (27.6 vs. 16.3%, P = 0.026). There were no differences in mean glycated haemoglobin and serum cholesterol between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS:Electronic feedback to general practitioners on the quality of Type 2 diabetes care resulted in significantly improved quality regarding processes of care according to guidelines. It was not possible to demonstrate any effect on secondary end-point measures within the follow-up period. Electronic feedback on quality of diabetes care can be effective in improving adherence to treatment according to evidence-based guidelines.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To evaluate the effect of an electronic feedback system to general practitioners on quality of Type 2 diabetes care. METHODS: A cluster randomized, controlled trial with 15 months follow-up. Eighty-six general practices (158 general practitioners) in a Danish county caring for 2458 people 40-70 years old with Type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive or not to receive electronic feedback on quality of care. People with Type 2 diabetes were identified using a validated algorithm. Primary end-points were processes of care according to guidelines on prescriptions redeemed for Type 2 diabetes treatments, measuring of glycated haemoglobin and cholesterol and visits to ophthalmologists. Secondary end-points were changes in level of glycated haemoglobin and serum cholesterol. Data were analysed using generalized linear models accounting for clustering at practice level. RESULTS: During follow-up, people with Type 2 diabetes in the intervention group more often redeemed recommended prescriptions than people in the control group, respectively, as follows: oral antidiabetic treatment (32.8 vs. 12.0%, P =0.002), insulin treatment (33.8 vs. 12.4%, P < 0.001), lipid-lowering medication (38.3 vs. 18.6%, 0.004) and blood pressure medication (27.6 vs. 16.3%, P = 0.026). There were no differences in mean glycated haemoglobin and serum cholesterol between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic feedback to general practitioners on the quality of Type 2 diabetes care resulted in significantly improved quality regarding processes of care according to guidelines. It was not possible to demonstrate any effect on secondary end-point measures within the follow-up period. Electronic feedback on quality of diabetes care can be effective in improving adherence to treatment according to evidence-based guidelines.
Authors: R K Simmons; A H Carlsen; S J Griffin; M Charles; J S Christiansen; K Borch-Johnsen; A Sandbaek; T Lauritzen Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2014-09-29 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Timothy Tuti; Jacinta Nzinga; Martin Njoroge; Benjamin Brown; Niels Peek; Mike English; Chris Paton; Sabine N van der Veer Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Henrik Schroll; René Depont Christensen; Janus Laust Thomsen; Morten Andersen; Søren Friborg; Jens Søndergaard Journal: Int J Family Med Date: 2012-07-24
Authors: John G Lawrenson; Ella Graham-Rowe; Fabiana Lorencatto; Jennifer Burr; Catey Bunce; Jillian J Francis; Patricia Aluko; Stephen Rice; Luke Vale; Tunde Peto; Justin Presseau; Noah Ivers; Jeremy M Grimshaw Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-01-15
Authors: Benjamin Brown; Panos Balatsoukas; Richard Williams; Matthew Sperrin; Iain Buchan Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2016-07-16 Impact factor: 4.046