Hasan Rehman1, Julia M Akeroyd2, David Ramsey2, Sarah T Ahmed2, Anwar T Merchant3, Sankar D Navaneethan4, Laura A Petersen2, Salim S Virani2,5. 1. Department of Medicine, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas. 2. Health Policy, Quality and Informatics Program, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Health Services Research and Development Center for Innovations, Houston, Texas; and Section of Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, WJB Dorn VA Medical Center, Columbia, South Carolina. 4. Section of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 5. Section of Cardiology, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; and Section of Cardiovascular Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intensive glycemic and blood pressure (BP) control in diabetic patients is associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there is suboptimal glycemic and BP control with significant facility-level variation in patients with diabetes. METHODS: We identified patients with diabetes receiving care in 130 facilities in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System. We assessed facility-level rates of glycemic (hemoglobin [Hb]A1c <7%), BP (BP <140/90 mmHg), and combined glycemic and BP control (HbA1c <7% and BP <140/90 mmHg), and their facility-level variation in using median rate ratios (MRR). RESULTS: Among 1 103 302 patients with diabetes, 50.2% participants had an HbA1c <7%, 77.5% had a BP <140/90 mmHg, and 39.8% had both, HbA1c <7% and BP <140/90 mmHg. Median facility-level rates were 50.3% (interquartile range [IQR], 47.9%-52.4%) for glycemic control, 78.4% (IQR, 75.2%-80.0%) for BP control, and 39.9% (IQR, 38.14%-42.34%) for combined glycemic and BP control. Unadjusted MRR for glycemic control was 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51-1.70) which decreased to 1.16 (95% CI: 1.14-1.19) after adjusting for patient and facility-level variables, indicating a 16% variation in glycemic control between 2 identical patients receiving care at 2 random facilities. Unadjusted MRR for BP control was 1.49 (95% CI: 1.41-1.56), which decreased to 1.25 (95% CI: 1.21-1.28), whereas unadjusted MRR for combined glycemic and BP control was 1.59 (95% CI: 1.50-1.68), which decreased to 1.15 (95% CI: 1.13-1.17) after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Facility-level rates for BP control and glycemic control remain low with significant facility-level variation. Much of this is explained by patient and facility-level variables although 16%, 25%, and 15% variation in glycemic, BP, and combined glycemic and BP control remains unexplained.
BACKGROUND: Intensive glycemic and blood pressure (BP) control in diabeticpatients is associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there is suboptimal glycemic and BP control with significant facility-level variation in patients with diabetes. METHODS: We identified patients with diabetes receiving care in 130 facilities in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System. We assessed facility-level rates of glycemic (hemoglobin [Hb]A1c <7%), BP (BP <140/90 mmHg), and combined glycemic and BP control (HbA1c <7% and BP <140/90 mmHg), and their facility-level variation in using median rate ratios (MRR). RESULTS: Among 1 103 302 patients with diabetes, 50.2% participants had an HbA1c <7%, 77.5% had a BP <140/90 mmHg, and 39.8% had both, HbA1c <7% and BP <140/90 mmHg. Median facility-level rates were 50.3% (interquartile range [IQR], 47.9%-52.4%) for glycemic control, 78.4% (IQR, 75.2%-80.0%) for BP control, and 39.9% (IQR, 38.14%-42.34%) for combined glycemic and BP control. Unadjusted MRR for glycemic control was 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51-1.70) which decreased to 1.16 (95% CI: 1.14-1.19) after adjusting for patient and facility-level variables, indicating a 16% variation in glycemic control between 2 identical patients receiving care at 2 random facilities. Unadjusted MRR for BP control was 1.49 (95% CI: 1.41-1.56), which decreased to 1.25 (95% CI: 1.21-1.28), whereas unadjusted MRR for combined glycemic and BP control was 1.59 (95% CI: 1.50-1.68), which decreased to 1.15 (95% CI: 1.13-1.17) after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Facility-level rates for BP control and glycemic control remain low with significant facility-level variation. Much of this is explained by patient and facility-level variables although 16%, 25%, and 15% variation in glycemic, BP, and combined glycemic and BP control remains unexplained.
Authors: David M Nathan; Patricia A Cleary; Jye-Yu C Backlund; Saul M Genuth; John M Lachin; Trevor J Orchard; Philip Raskin; Bernard Zinman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: LeChauncy D Woodard; Cassie R Landrum; Tracy H Urech; Jochen Profit; Salim S Virani; Laura A Petersen Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Ashley J Beard; Timothy P Hofer; John R Downs; Michelle Lucatorto; Mandi L Klamerus; Rob Holleman; Eve A Kerr Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2012-12-11
Authors: Caroline S Fox; Sean Coady; Paul D Sorlie; Daniel Levy; James B Meigs; Ralph B D'Agostino; Peter W F Wilson; Peter J Savage Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-11-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rury R Holman; Sanjoy K Paul; M Angelyn Bethel; David R Matthews; H Andrew W Neil Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: LeChauncy D Woodard; Cassie R Landrum; Tracy H Urech; Degang Wang; Salim S Virani; Laura A Petersen Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Patrick J O'Connor; William A Rush; Gestur Davidson; Thomas A Louis; Leif I Solberg; Lauren Crain; Paul E Johnson; Robin R Whitebird Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2007-12-15 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Karen L Margolis; Patrick J O'Connor; Timothy M Morgan; John B Buse; Robert M Cohen; William C Cushman; Jeffrey A Cutler; Gregory W Evans; Hertzel C Gerstein; Richard H Grimm; Edward W Lipkin; K M Venkat Narayan; Matthew C Riddle; Ajay Sood; David C Goff Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2014-03-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Sankar D Navaneethan; Julia M Akeroyd; David Ramsey; Sarah T Ahmed; Shiva Raj Mishra; Laura A Petersen; Paul Muntner; Christie Ballantyne; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Venkat Ramanathan; Salim S Virani Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Dhruv Mahtta; David J Ramsey; Michelle T Lee; Liang Chen; Mahmoud Al Rifai; Julia M Akeroyd; Elizabeth M Vaughan; Michael E Matheny; Karla Rodrigues do Espirito Santo; Sankar D Navaneethan; Carl J Lavie; Yochai Birnbaum; Christie M Ballantyne; Laura A Petersen; Salim S Virani Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Lindsey Powers Happ; Anne K Monroe; Heather A Young; Yan Ma; Alan E Greenberg; Michael A Horberg; Amanda D Castel Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 3.731