System Barriers Associated With Diabetes Management in Primary Care

The Role of Physician and Practice Characteristics in the Quality of Diabetes Management in Primary Care: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence-based guidelines, high-quality diabetes care is not always achieved. Identifying factors associated with the quality of management in primary care may inform service improvements, facilitating the tailoring of quality improvement interventions to practice needs and resources.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science from January 1990 to March 2019. Eligible studies were cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and randomised controlled trials (baseline data) conducted among adults with diabetes, which examined the relationship between any physician and/or practice factors and any objective measure(s) of quality. Studies which examined patient factors only were ineligible. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 82 studies were included. The range of individual quality measures and the construction of composite measures varied considerably. Female physicians compared with males ((odds ratio (OR) = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.10), 8 studies), physicians with higher diabetes volume compared with lower volume (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05-1.47, 4 studies) and practices with Electronic Health Records (EHR) versus practices without (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.11-1.84, 4 studies) were associated with a higher quality of care. There was no association between physician experience, practice location and type of practice and quality. Based on the narrative synthesis, increasing physician age and higher practice socio-economic deprivation may be associated with lower quality of care.

DISCUSSION

Identification of physician- and practice-level factors associated with the quality of care (female gender, younger age, physician-level diabetes volume, practice deprivation and EHR use) may explain differences across practices and physicians, provide potential targets for quality improvement interventions and indicate which practices need specific supports to deliver improvements in diabetes care.

Development of an intervention to facilitate implementation and uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening

BACKGROUND

'Implementation interventions' refer to methods used to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical interventions such as diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS). DRS is effective, yet uptake is often suboptimal. Despite most routine management taking place in primary care and the central role of health care professionals (HCP) in referring to DRS, few interventions have been developed for primary care. We aimed to develop a multifaceted intervention targeting both professionals and patients to improve DRS uptake as an example of a systematic development process combining theory, stakeholder involvement, and evidence.

METHODS

First, we identified target behaviours through an audit in primary care of screening attendance. Second, we interviewed patients (n = 47) and HCP (n = 30), to identify determinants of uptake using the Theoretical Domains Framework, mapping these to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to develop intervention content. Thirdly, we conducted semi-structured consensus groups with stakeholders, specifically users of the intervention, i.e. patients (n = 15) and HCPs (n = 16), regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and local relevance of selected BCTs and potential delivery modes. We consulted representatives from the national DRS programme to check intervention 'fit' with existing processes. We applied the APEASE criteria (affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, side effects, and equity) to select the final intervention components, drawing on findings from the previous steps, and a rapid evidence review of operationalised BCT effectiveness.

RESULTS

We identified potentially modifiable target behaviours at the patient (consent, attendance) and professional (registration) level. Patient barriers to consent/attendance included confusion between screening and routine eye checks, and fear of a negative result. Enablers included a recommendation from friends/family or professionals and recognising screening importance. Professional barriers to registration included the time to register patients and a lack of readily available information on uptake in their local area/practice. Most operationalised BCTs were acceptable to patients and HCPs while the response to feasibility varied. After considering APEASE, the core intervention, incorporating a range of BCTs, involved audit/feedback, electronic prompts targeting professionals, HCP-endorsed reminders (face-to-face, by phone and letter), and an information leaflet for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the example of an intervention to improve DRS uptake, this study illustrates an approach to integrate theory with user involvement. This process highlighted tensions between theory-informed and stakeholder suggestions, and the need to apply the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)/BCT structure flexibly. The final intervention draws on the trusted professional-patient relationship, leveraging existing services to enhance implementation of the DRS programme. Intervention feasibility in primary care will be evaluated in a randomised cluster pilot trial.

Quality of Care for Patients With Diabetes and Mulitmorbidity Registered at Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics

Background

Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics are a new model of primary healthcare in Ontario. Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics are distinctive in that nurse practitioners are the primary care providers working with an interprofessional team. There have been no evaluations of the quality of care within the Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinic model.

Purpose

Evaluation of the Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinic model, specifically for complex clinical presentations, will provide insights that may be used to inform improvements to the delivery of care in the Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent to which diabetes care was complete and to determine the impact of organizational tools, including electronic medical record tracking, diabetes care template, and referral to community programs, on the completeness of care for patients with diabetes and multimorbidity at Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics.

Methods

An audit of 30 charts was conducted at five different Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics (n = 150) for patients with diabetes and at least one other chronic condition. Indicators included patient and organizational characteristics as well as diabetes care items taken from diabetes clinical guidelines.

Results

Overall, care for patients with diabetes and multimorbidity in Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics was complete. However, there were no significant associations between patient or organizational characteristics and the extent to which diabetes care was complete.

Experiences of being a family member to an older person with diabetes receiving home care services

AIM

To describe family members' experiences of attending to an old person with diabetes receiving home care services, including their interaction with the formal caregivers.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study has a qualitative descriptive design. From May to August 2015, eight family members were interviewed. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. To describe family members' experiences, the following four themes were identified: Security through patients' self-management skills and diabetes knowledge; Perceived burden due to the old persons' deteriorated health; Security through competent home care services; and Doubt due to personnel's inadequate approach and interaction.

CONCLUSION

It is important for personnel in home care services to consider patients' self-management skills and the family members' diabetes knowledge as key aspects in order to limit experiences of burden when the older person with diabetes has deteriorating health. The findings underscore that interaction with home care personnel skilled in managing diabetes helps family members feel secure.

Achieving change in primary care--causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews

Background

This study is to identify, summarise and synthesise literature on the causes of the evidence to practice gap for complex interventions in primary care.

Design

This study is a systematic review of reviews.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO were searched, from inception to December 2013. Eligible reviews addressed causes of the evidence to practice gap in primary care in developed countries. Data from included reviews were extracted and synthesised using guidelines for meta-synthesis.

Results

Seventy reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria and encompassed a wide range of topics, e.g. guideline implementation, integration of new roles, technology implementation, public health and preventative medicine. None of the included papers used the term “cause” or stated an intention to investigate causes at all. A descriptive approach was often used, and the included papers expressed “causes” in terms of “barriers and facilitators” to implementation. We developed a four-level framework covering external context, organisation, professionals and intervention. External contextual factors included policies, incentivisation structures, dominant paradigms, stakeholders’ buy-in, infrastructure and advances in technology. Organisation-related factors included culture, available resources, integration with existing processes, relationships, skill mix and staff involvement. At the level of individual professionals, professional role, underlying philosophy of care and competencies were important. Characteristics of the intervention that impacted on implementation included evidence of benefit, ease of use and adaptability to local circumstances. We postulate that the “fit” between the intervention and the context is critical in determining the success of implementation.

Conclusions

This comprehensive review of reviews summarises current knowledge on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of diverse complex interventions in primary care. To maximise the uptake of complex interventions in primary care, health care professionals and commissioning organisations should consider the range of contextual factors, remaining aware of the dynamic nature of context. Future studies should place an emphasis on describing context and articulating the relationships between the factors identified here.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42014009410

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0396-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.