Association between telemedicine use and diabetes risk factor assessment and control in a primary care network

[Diabetes control and visits to the family doctor during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicenter study in primary care]

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether in patients with type 2 diabetes (DM2) the changes in their relationship with family doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person (iPC) and telematic (TC) consultations, were associated with control of their disease.

DESIGN

Multicentric study of retrospective follow-up.

SETTING

Seven health centers in Tenerife, Spain.

PARTICIPANTS

3543 patients with DM2.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Sex, age, iPC, TC and DM2 control using glycosylated hemoglobin (A1c) during the period 2019-2021. Logistic regression models were fitted with DM2 control as an effect, and with the other measurements as independent variables.

RESULTS

50% were women. 38% were less than 65 years old. A1c was measured in 84% of patients in 2019, 68% in 2020, and 77% in 2021. 58.4% had good control in 2019, 46.1% in 2020, and 50.3% in 2021. Median iPC were 7 in 2019, 4 in 2020 and 5 in 2021 (p<0.001). The OR(95%CI) of good control in 2019 were 1.04(1.04-1.05) per year of age and 1.03(1.01-1.04) for each iPC; In 2020 they were 1.04 (1.03-1.05) per year of age, 1.05 (1.04-1.07) for each iPC and 1.04 (1.02-1.07) for each TC; in 2021 they were 1.04 (1.04-1.05) per year of age, 1.05 (1.03-1.06) for each iPC and 1.02 (1.00-1.04) for each TC.

CONCLUSIONS

The control of patients with DM2 during the period 2019-2021 had a direct relationship with the change in the frequency of consultations at the health center, with differences depending on the type of consultation and the age of the patient.

Patterns of Telemedicine Use and Glycemic Outcomes of Endocrinology Care for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Importance

Telemedicine can increase access to endocrinology care for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but patterns of use and outcomes of telemedicine specialty care for adults with T2D beyond initial uptake in 2020 are not known.

Objective

To evaluate patterns of telemedicine use and their association with glycemic control among adults with varying clinical complexity receiving endocrinology care for T2D.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective cohort study in a single large integrated US health system. Participants were adults who had a telemedicine endocrinology visit for T2D from May to October 2020. Data were analyzed from June 2022 to October 2023.

Exposure

Patients were followed up through May 2022 and assigned to telemedicine-only, in-person, or mixed care (both telemedicine and in-person) cohorts according to visit modality.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multivariable regression models were used to estimate hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) change at 12 months within each cohort and the association of factors indicating clinical complexity (insulin regimen and cardiovascular and psychological comorbidities) with HbA1c change across cohorts. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients with baseline HbA1c of 8% or higher.

Results

Of 11 498 potentially eligible patients, 3778 were included in the final cohort (81 Asian participants [2%], 300 Black participants [8%], and 3332 White participants [88%]); 1182 used telemedicine only (mean [SD] age 57.4 [12.9] years; 743 female participants [63%]), 1049 used in-person care (mean [SD] age 63.0 [12.2] years; 577 female participants [55%]), and 1547 used mixed care (mean [SD] age 60.7 [12.5] years; 881 female participants [57%]). Among telemedicine-only patients, there was no significant change in adjusted HbA1c at 12 months (-0.06%; 95% CI, -0.26% to 0.14%; P = .55) while in-person and mixed cohorts had improvements of 0.37% (95% CI, 0.15% to 0.59%; P < .001) and 0.22% (95% CI, 0.07% to 0.38%; P = .004), respectively. Patients with a baseline HbA1c of 8% or higher had a similar pattern of glycemic outcomes. For patients prescribed multiple daily injections vs no insulin, the 12-month estimated change in HbA1c was 0.25% higher (95% CI, 0.02% to 0.47%; P = .03) for telemedicine vs in-person care. Comorbidities were not associated with HbA1c change in any cohort.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of adults with T2D receiving endocrinology care, patients using telemedicine alone had inferior glycemic outcomes compared with patients who used in-person or mixed care. Additional strategies may be needed to support adults with T2D who rely on telemedicine alone to access endocrinology care, especially for those with complex treatment or elevated HbA1c.

Value of internet of things-based diagnosis-treatment model in improving the quality of medical services during COVID-19 outbreak

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate the value of Internet of things (IoT)-based diagnosis-treatment model in improving medical service quality during the novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) outbreak.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, 483 patients with chronic diseases treated between January 2020 and March 2021 were selected and grouped as follows based on different intervention methods: a research group (the Res group) with 229 patients that were given IoT-based diagnosis and treatment, and a control group (the Con group) with 254 patients that were treated with routine diagnosis and treatment. The qualified rate of medical records, the missing rate of medical records, and the incidence of doctor-patient disputes were compared between the two groups. In addition, investigations were made regarding patients' daily living ability, psychological state, health behavior, self-care ability, quality of life, as well as treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the qualified rate of medical records between the Res group and the Con group (P>0.05), but the missing rate of medical records and the incidence of doctor-patient disputes were lower in the Res group (both P<0.05). An obviously improved living ability was observed in both groups after the treatment (both P<0.05), with no statistical significance between groups (P>0.05). Besides, the Res group presented lower scores of SAS and SDS but higher scores of SRAHP, ES-CA and SF-36 than the Con group after treatment (all P<0.05). Finally, according to the satisfaction survey, more patients in the Res group were very satisfied but fewer cases were dissatisfied with the medical service they received as compared with the Con group (both P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The IoT-based diagnosis-treatment model can effectively improve the quality of medical services and patients' self-care ability, which is extremely important and promising for addressing the current medical limitations during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Role of telemedicine during COVID-19 pandemic in type 2 diabetes outpatients: The AMD annals initiative

AIMS

Telemedicine is advocated as a fundamental tool in modern clinical management. However, data on the effects of telemedicine vs face-to-face consultation on clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are still uncertain. This paper describes the use of telemedicine during the 2020 COVID-19 emergency and compares volume activity and quality indicators of diabetes care between face-to-face vs telemedicine counseling in the large cohort of T2DM patients from the AMD Annals Initiative.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical characteristics, including laboratory parameters, rate of the screening of long-term complications, current therapies and the Q-score, a validated score that measures the overall quality of care, were compared between 364,898 patients attending face-to-face consultation and 46,424 on telemedicine, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Patients on telemedicine showed lower HbA1c levels (7.1 ± 1.2 % vs 7.3 ± 1.3 %, p < 0.0001), and they were less frequently treated with metformin, GLP1-RAs and SGLT2i and more frequently with DPP4i. The telemedicine group showed reduced monitoring of the various parameters considered as process indicators, especially, eye and foot examination. The proportion of patients with a good quality of care (Q score > 25) was higher among those receiving face-to-face consultation. Moreover, in the telemedicine group, all major clinical outcomes remained stable when further compared to those collected in the year 2019, when the same patients underwent a regular face-to-face consultation, suggesting that the care provided through telemedicine did not negatively affect the most important parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine provided an acceptable quality of diabetes care, comparable to that of patients attending face-to-face consultation, although a less frequent screening of complications seems to have occurred in subjects consulted by telemedicine.