PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine what strategies and factors are most important for high performance in the primary care of patients with diabetes. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods, cross-sectional, observational analysis of interviews and characteristics of primary care clinics in Minnesota and bordering areas. We compared strategies, facilitators, and barriers identified by 31 leaders of 17 clinics in high-, middle-, and low-performance quartiles on a standardized composite measure of diabetes outcomes for 416 of 586 primary care clinics. Semistructured interview data were combined with quantitative data regarding clinic performance and a survey of the presence of care management processes. RESULTS: The interview analysis identified 10 themes providing unique insights into the factors and strategies characterizing the 3 performance groups. The main difference was the degree to which top-performing clinics used patient data to guide proactive and outreach methods to intensify treatment and monitor effect. Top clinics also appeared to view visit-based care management processes as necessary but insufficient, whereas all respondents regarded being part of a large system as mostly helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Top-performing clinic approaches to diabetes care differ from lower-performing clinics primarily by emphasizing data-driven proactive outreach to patients to intensify treatment. Although confirmatory studies are needed, clinical leaders should consider the value of this paradigm shift in approach to care.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine what strategies and factors are most important for high performance in the primary care of patients with diabetes. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods, cross-sectional, observational analysis of interviews and characteristics of primary care clinics in Minnesota and bordering areas. We compared strategies, facilitators, and barriers identified by 31 leaders of 17 clinics in high-, middle-, and low-performance quartiles on a standardized composite measure of diabetes outcomes for 416 of 586 primary care clinics. Semistructured interview data were combined with quantitative data regarding clinic performance and a survey of the presence of care management processes. RESULTS: The interview analysis identified 10 themes providing unique insights into the factors and strategies characterizing the 3 performance groups. The main difference was the degree to which top-performing clinics used patient data to guide proactive and outreach methods to intensify treatment and monitor effect. Top clinics also appeared to view visit-based care management processes as necessary but insufficient, whereas all respondents regarded being part of a large system as mostly helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Top-performing clinic approaches to diabetes care differ from lower-performing clinics primarily by emphasizing data-driven proactive outreach to patients to intensify treatment. Although confirmatory studies are needed, clinical leaders should consider the value of this paradigm shift in approach to care.
Authors: Leif I Solberg; A Lauren Crain; Joann M Sperl-Hillen; Mary C Hroscikoski; Karen I Engebretson; Patrick J O'Connor Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Kaveh G Shojania; Sumant R Ranji; Kathryn M McDonald; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Vandana Sundaram; Robert J Rushakoff; Douglas K Owens Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-07-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jacqueline R Halladay; Darren A DeWalt; Alison Wise; Bahjat Qaqish; Kristin Reiter; Shoou-Yih Lee; Ann Lefebvre; Kimberly Ward; C Madeline Mitchell; Katrina E Donahue Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Leif I Solberg; A Lauren Crain; Nancy Jaeckels; Kris A Ohnsorg; Karen L Margolis; Arne Beck; Robin R Whitebird; Rebecca C Rossom; Benjamin F Crabtree; Andrew H Van de Ven Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2013-11-16 Impact factor: 7.327