Literature DB >> 21671526

Patient complexity and diabetes quality of care in rural settings.

Amanda H Salanitro1, Monika M Safford, Thomas K Houston, Jessica H Williams, Fernando Ovalle, Pamela Payne-Foster, Jeroan J Allison, Carlos A Estrada.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Even though pay-for-performance programs are being rapidly implemented, little is known about how patient complexity affects practice-level performance assessment in rural settings. We sought to determine the association between patient complexity and practice-level performance in the rural United States. BASIC PROCEDURES: Using baseline data from a trial aimed at improving diabetes care, we determined factors associated with a practice's proportion of patients having controlled diabetes (hemoglobin A1c<or=7%): patient socioeconomic factors, clinical factors, difficulty with self-testing of blood glucose, and difficulty with keeping appointments. We used linear regression to adjust the practice-level proportion with A1c controlled for these factors. We compared practice rankings using observed and expected performance and classified practices into hypothetical pay-for-performance categories. MAIN
FINDINGS: Rural primary care practices (n=135) in 11 southeastern states provided information for 1641 patients with diabetes. For practices in the best quartile of observed control, 76.1% of patients had controlled diabetes vs 19.3% of patients in the worst quartile. After controlling for other variables, proportions of diabetes control were 10% lower in those practices whose patients had the greatest difficulty with either self testing or appointment keeping (p<.05 for both). Practice rankings based on observed and expected proportion of A1c control showed only moderate agreement in pay-for-performance categories (kappa=0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.56; p<001). PRINCIPAL
CONCLUSIONS: Basing public reporting and resource allocation on quality assessment that does not account for patient characteristics may further harm this vulnerable group of patients and physicians.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21671526      PMCID: PMC3156053          DOI: 10.1016/s0027-9684(15)30297-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc        ISSN: 0027-9684            Impact factor:   1.798


  25 in total

1.  Standards of medical care in diabetes--2006.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Impact of self-reported patient characteristics upon assessment of glycemic control in the Veterans Health Administration.

Authors:  Miriam Maney; Chin-Lin Tseng; Monika M Safford; Donald R Miller; Leonard M Pogach
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  The importance of recognizing patients' time as a cost of self-management.

Authors:  Louise B Russell; Monika M Safford
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.229

4.  The unreliability of individual physician "report cards" for assessing the costs and quality of care of a chronic disease.

Authors:  T P Hofer; R A Hayward; S Greenfield; E H Wagner; S H Kaplan; W G Manning
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Investing time in health: do socioeconomically disadvantaged patients spend more or less extra time on diabetes self-care?

Authors:  Susan L Ettner; Betsy L Cadwell; Louise B Russell; Arleen Brown; Andrew J Karter; Monika Safford; Carol Mangione; Gloria Beckles; William H Herman; Theodore J Thompson
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Efficacy of self monitoring of blood glucose in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (ESMON study): randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Maurice J O'Kane; Brendan Bunting; Margaret Copeland; Vivien E Coates
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-04-17

7.  Why don't diabetes patients achieve recommended risk factor targets? Poor adherence versus lack of treatment intensification.

Authors:  Julie A Schmittdiel; Connie S Uratsu; Andrew J Karter; Michele Heisler; Usha Subramanian; Carol M Mangione; Joe V Selby
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Benchmarking physician performance: reliability of individual and composite measures.

Authors:  Sarah Hudson Scholle; Joachim Roski; John L Adams; Daniel L Dunn; Eve A Kerr; Donna Pillittere Dugan; Roxanne E Jensen
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.229

9.  Patient complexity: more than comorbidity. the vector model of complexity.

Authors:  Monika M Safford; Jeroan J Allison; Catarina I Kiefe
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Patient complexity in quality comparisons for glycemic control: an observational study.

Authors:  Monika M Safford; Michael Brimacombe; Quanwu Zhang; Mangala Rajan; Minge Xie; Wesley Thompson; John Kolassa; Miriam Maney; Leonard Pogach
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  3 in total

1.  Diabetes care quality is highly correlated with patient panel characteristics.

Authors:  Steffani R Bailey; Jean P O'Malley; Rachel Gold; John Heintzman; Sonja Likumahuwa; Jennifer E DeVoe
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.657

2.  Quality of diabetes mellitus care by rural primary care physicians.

Authors:  Stephen A Tonks; Sohil Makwana; Amanda H Salanitro; Monika M Safford; Thomas K Houston; Jeroan J Allison; William Curry; Carlos A Estrada
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Principles of Point of Care Culture, the Spatial Care Path™, and Enabling Community and Global Resilience: Enabling Community and Global Resilience.

Authors:  J Kost Gerald; J Ferguson William; E Kost Laurie
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2014-09-04
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.