Elizabeth M Magnan1, Mari Palta2, Heather M Johnson3, Christie M Bartels3, Jessica R Schumacher4, Maureen A Smith5. 1. Health Innovation Program, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA. Electronic address: elizabeth.magnan@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu. 2. Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 3. Health Innovation Program, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 4. Health Innovation Program, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 5. Health Innovation Program, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Family Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: Most patients with diabetes have comorbid chronic conditions that could support (concordant) or compete with (discordant) diabetes care. We sought to determine the impact of the number of concordant and discordant chronic conditions on diabetes care quality. METHODS: Logistic regression analysis of electronic health record data from 7 health systems on 24,430 patients with diabetes aged 18-75 years. Diabetes testing and control quality care goals were the outcome variables. The number of diabetes-concordant and the number of diabetes-discordant conditions were the main explanatory variables. Analysis was adjusted for health care utilization, health system and patient demographics. RESULTS: A higher number of concordant conditions were associated with higher odds of achieving testing and control goals for all outcomes except blood pressure control. There was no to minimal positive association between the number of discordant conditions and outcomes, except for cholesterol testing which was less likely with 4+ discordant conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Having more concordant conditions makes diabetes care goal achievement more likely. The number of discordant conditions has a smaller, inconsistently significant impact on diabetes goal achievement. Interventions to improve diabetes care need to align with a patient's comorbidities, including the absence of comorbidities, especially concordant comorbidities.
AIMS: Most patients with diabetes have comorbid chronic conditions that could support (concordant) or compete with (discordant) diabetes care. We sought to determine the impact of the number of concordant and discordant chronic conditions on diabetes care quality. METHODS: Logistic regression analysis of electronic health record data from 7 health systems on 24,430 patients with diabetes aged 18-75 years. Diabetes testing and control quality care goals were the outcome variables. The number of diabetes-concordant and the number of diabetes-discordant conditions were the main explanatory variables. Analysis was adjusted for health care utilization, health system and patient demographics. RESULTS: A higher number of concordant conditions were associated with higher odds of achieving testing and control goals for all outcomes except blood pressure control. There was no to minimal positive association between the number of discordant conditions and outcomes, except for cholesterol testing which was less likely with 4+ discordant conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Having more concordant conditions makes diabetes care goal achievement more likely. The number of discordant conditions has a smaller, inconsistently significant impact on diabetes goal achievement. Interventions to improve diabetes care need to align with a patient's comorbidities, including the absence of comorbidities, especially concordant comorbidities.
Authors: Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Amy J H Kind; Christie M Bartels; Christine M Everett; Maureen A Smith Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-03-16 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Paul A James; Suzanne Oparil; Barry L Carter; William C Cushman; Cheryl Dennison-Himmelfarb; Joel Handler; Daniel T Lackland; Michael L LeFevre; Thomas D MacKenzie; Olugbenga Ogedegbe; Sidney C Smith; Laura P Svetkey; Sandra J Taler; Raymond R Townsend; Jackson T Wright; Andrew S Narva; Eduardo Ortiz Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Elizabeth A Bayliss; Denise E Bonds; Cynthia M Boyd; Melinda M Davis; Bruce Finke; Michael H Fox; Russell E Glasgow; Richard A Goodman; Suzanne Heurtin-Roberts; Sue Lachenmayr; Cristin Lind; Elizabeth A Madigan; David S Meyers; Suzanne Mintz; Wendy J Nilsen; Sally Okun; Sarah Ruiz; Marcel E Salive; Kurt C Stange Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Donna M Zulman; Steven M Asch; Susana B Martins; Eve A Kerr; Brian B Hoffman; Mary K Goldstein Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jaco Voorham; Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Dick de Zeeuw; Ronald P Stolk; Petra Denig Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sri Ram Pentakota; Mangala Rajan; B Graeme Fincke; Chin-Lin Tseng; Donald R Miller; Cindy L Christiansen; Eve A Kerr; Leonard M Pogach Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-03-19 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Courtney A Polenick; Amanda N Leggett; Noah J Webster; Benjamin H Han; Steven H Zarit; John D Piette Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Elizabeth M Magnan; Daniel M Bolt; Robert T Greenlee; Jennifer Fink; Maureen A Smith Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2016-11-13 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Maria Ukhanova; Sheila Markwardt; Jon P Furuno; Laura Davis; Brie N Noble; Ana R Quiñones Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Michaela L Schiøtz; Dorte Høst; Mikkel B Christensen; Helena Domínguez; Yasmin Hamid; Merete Almind; Kim L Sørensen; Thomas Saxild; Rikke Høgsbro Holm; Anne Frølich Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-11-18 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Chandra Sarkar; Hiten Dodhia; James Crompton; Peter Schofield; Patrick White; Christopher Millett; Mark Ashworth Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Elizabeth M Magnan; Mari Palta; Jane E Mahoney; Nancy Pandhi; Daniel M Bolt; Jennifer Fink; Robert T Greenlee; Maureen A Smith Journal: BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Date: 2015-07-23