Kevin A Peterson1, Caroline Carlin2, Leif I Solberg3, Rachel Jacobsen2, Toni Kriel2, Milton Eder2. 1. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN peter223@umn.edu. 2. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN. 3. HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The effective redesign of primary care delivery systems to improve diabetes care requires an understanding of which particular components of delivery consistently lead to better clinical outcomes. We identified associations between common systems of care management (SysCMs) and the frequency of meeting standardized performance targets for Optimal Diabetes Care (NQF#0729) in primary care practices. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A validated survey of 585 eligible family or general internal medicine practices seeing ≥30 adult patients with diabetes in or near Minnesota during 2017 evaluated the presence of 62 SysCMs. From 419 (72%) practices completing the survey, NQF#0729 was determined in 396 (95%) from electronic health records, including 215,842 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: Three SysCMs were associated with higher rates of meeting performance targets across all practices: 1) a systematic process for shared decision making with patients (P = 0.001), 2) checklists of tests or interventions needed for prevention or monitoring of diabetes (P = 0.002), and 3) physician reminders of guideline-based age-appropriate risk assessments due at the patient visit (P = 0.002). When all three were in place, an additional 10.8% of the population achieved recommended performance measures. In subgroup analysis, 15 additional SysCMs were associated with better care in particular types of practices. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes care outcomes are better in primary care settings that use a patient-centered approach to systematically engage patients in decision making, remind physicians of age-appropriate risk assessments, and provide checklists for recommended diabetes interventions. Practice size and location are important considerations when redesigning delivery systems to improve performance.
OBJECTIVE: The effective redesign of primary care delivery systems to improve diabetes care requires an understanding of which particular components of delivery consistently lead to better clinical outcomes. We identified associations between common systems of care management (SysCMs) and the frequency of meeting standardized performance targets for Optimal Diabetes Care (NQF#0729) in primary care practices. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A validated survey of 585 eligible family or general internal medicine practices seeing ≥30 adult patients with diabetes in or near Minnesota during 2017 evaluated the presence of 62 SysCMs. From 419 (72%) practices completing the survey, NQF#0729 was determined in 396 (95%) from electronic health records, including 215,842 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: Three SysCMs were associated with higher rates of meeting performance targets across all practices: 1) a systematic process for shared decision making with patients (P = 0.001), 2) checklists of tests or interventions needed for prevention or monitoring of diabetes (P = 0.002), and 3) physician reminders of guideline-based age-appropriate risk assessments due at the patient visit (P = 0.002). When all three were in place, an additional 10.8% of the population achieved recommended performance measures. In subgroup analysis, 15 additional SysCMs were associated with better care in particular types of practices. CONCLUSIONS:Diabetes care outcomes are better in primary care settings that use a patient-centered approach to systematically engage patients in decision making, remind physicians of age-appropriate risk assessments, and provide checklists for recommended diabetes interventions. Practice size and location are important considerations when redesigning delivery systems to improve performance.
Authors: Russell E Glasgow; Paul A Nutting; Diane K King; Candace C Nelson; Gary Cutter; Bridget Gaglio; Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Holly Whitesides; Hilarea Amthauer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Patrick J O'Connor; Jay Desai; Leif I Solberg; Laurel A Reger; A Lauren Crain; Stephen E Asche; Teresa L Pearson; Cynthia K Clark; William A Rush; Linda M Cherney; Joann M Sperl-Hillen; Donald B Bishop Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Thomas J Flottemesch; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Patrick J O'Connor; Leif I Solberg; Steve Asche; L Gregory Pawlson Journal: Med Care Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Neil H White; Wanjie Sun; Patricia A Cleary; William V Tamborlane; Ronald P Danis; Dean P Hainsworth; Matthew D Davis Journal: Diabetes Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Rebecca J Mullan; Victor M Montori; Nilay D Shah; Teresa J H Christianson; Sandra C Bryant; Gordon H Guyatt; Lilisbeth I Perestelo-Perez; Robert J Stroebel; Barbara P Yawn; Victor Yapuncich; Maggie A Breslin; Laurie Pencille; Steven A Smith Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-09-28
Authors: Leif I Solberg; A Lauren Crain; Juliana Tillema; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Patricia Fontaine; Robin Whitebird Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Leif I Solberg; Kevin A Peterson; Helen Fu; Milton Eder; Rachel Jacobsen; Caroline S Carlin Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2021 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.707