Literature DB >> 32229656

Availability and analytical quality of hemoglobin A1c point-of-care testing in general practitioners' offices are associated with better glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.

Mette C Tollånes1, Anne K Jenum2, Tore Julsrud Berg3,4, Karianne F Løvaas1, John G Cooper1,5, Sverre Sandberg1,6,7.   

Abstract

Background It is not clear if point-of-care (POC) testing for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is associated with glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we linked general practitioner (GP) data on 22,778 Norwegian type 2 diabetes patients to data from the Norwegian Organization for Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations. We used general and generalized linear mixed models to investigate if GP offices' availability (yes/no) and analytical quality of HbA1c POC testing (average yearly "trueness score", 0-4), as well as frequency of participation in HbA1c external quality assurance (EQA) surveys, were associated with patients' HbA1c levels during 2014-2017. Results Twenty-eight out of 393 GP offices (7%) did not perform HbA1c POC testing. After adjusting for confounders, their patients had on average 0.15% higher HbA1c levels (95% confidence interval (0.04-0.27) (1.7 mmol/mol [0.5-2.9]). GP offices participating in one or two yearly HbA1c EQA surveys, rather than the maximum of four, had patients with on average 0.17% higher HbA1c levels (0.06, 0.28) (1.8 mmol/mol [0.6, 3.1]). For each unit increase in the GP offices' HbA1c POC analytical trueness score, the patients' HbA1c levels were lower by 0.04% HbA1c (-0.09, -0.001) (-0.5 mmol/mol [-1.0, -0.01]). Conclusions Novel use of validated patient data in combination with laboratory EQA data showed that patients consulting GPs in offices that perform HbA1c POC testing, participate in HbA1c EQA surveys, and maintain good analytical quality have lower HbA1c levels. Accurate HbA1c POC results, available during consultations, may improve diabetes care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  glycemic control; hemoglobin A1c; point-of-care testing; primary care; type 2 diabetes

Year:  2020        PMID: 32229656     DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2020-0026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  2 in total

1.  Cohort profile: Outcomes & Multi-morbidity In Type 2 diabetes (OMIT) - a national registry-based observational cohort with focus on care and treatment of key high-risk groups in Norway.

Authors:  Rachel B Forster; Ragnhild B Strandberg; Katrina Louise Bø Tibballs; Kjersti Nøkleby; Tore Julsrud Berg; Tor Iversen; Terje P Hagen; Kåre Rønn Richardsen; John Cooper; Sverre Sandberg; Karianne Fjeld Løvaas; Roy Miodini Nilsen; Marjolein Memelink Iversen; Anne Karen Jenum; Esben Selmer Selmer Buhl
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 3.006

2.  Monitoring of Diabetic Patients with Poor Glycemic Control.Are International Recommendations Met?

Authors:  José Antonio Delgado; Josep Miquel Bauça
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2021-02-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.