Utilisation of multidisciplinary services for diabetes care in the rural setting

Impact of pharmacist-involved collaborative care on diabetes management in a primary healthcare setting using real-world data

Background Diabetes mellitus is a complex multi-system disorder, requiring multi-disciplinary care. The conventional care model, where physicians are the sole caregivers may not be optimal. Addition of other healthcare team members improves healthcare outcomes for patients with diabetes. Aim To evaluate the impact of pharmacist-involved collaborative care on diabetes-related outcomes among patients with diabetes attending a primary healthcare setting  in Qatar using real-world data. Method A retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients with diabetes attending Qatar Petroleum Diabetes Clinic. Patients were categorized as either receiving pharmacist-involved collaborative care (intervention group) or usual care (control group). Data were analyzed using SPSS^®. Glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin A₁c, HbA₁c), blood pressure, lipid profile, and body mass index were evaluated at baseline and up to 17 months of follow-up. Results After 17 months of follow-up, pharmacist-involved collaborative care compared to usual care resulted in a significant decrease in HbA₁c (6.8 ± 1.2% vs. 7.1 ± 1.3%, p < 0.01). Moreover, compared to baseline, pharmacist-involved collaborative care significantly improved (p < 0.05) the levels of HbA_1c (7.5% vs. 6.8%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (3.7 mmol/L vs. 2.8 mmol/L), total cholesterol (5.43 mmol/L vs. 4.34 mmol/L), and body mass index (30.42 kg/m² vs. 30.17 kg/m²) after 17 months within the intervention group. However, no significant changes for these parameters occurred within the control group. Conclusion The implementation of pharmacist-involved collaborative care in a primary healthcare setting improved several diabetes-related outcomes over 17 months. Future studies should determine the long-term impact of this care model.

Collaborative care model for diabetes in primary care settings in Qatar: a qualitative exploration among healthcare professionals and patients who experienced the service

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent and associated with huge economic burden globally. The conventional care and management of diabetes mellitus is highly fragmented and complex, warranting the need for a comprehensive Collaborative Care Model (CCM). Little is known about the perception of patients with diabetes and their healthcare providers about CCM, its barriers and facilitators. This study aimed to explore the value of CCM in diabetes care at a primary healthcare (PHC) setting from the perspective of patients with diabetes and healthcare professionals (HCPs), in an effort to expand our current knowledge on collaborative care in diabetes at primary care level for the purpose of quality improvement and service expansion.

METHODS

Using an exploratory case study approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted among patients and HCPs who encountered CCM in Qatar during 2019 and 2020. The semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim and the data were analysed and interpreted using a deductive-inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Twelve patients and 12 HCPs at a diabetes clinic participated in one-to-one interviews. The interviews resulted in five different themes: the process and components of collaborative care model (four subthemes), current organizational support and resources (three subthemes), impact of collaborative care model on diabetes outcomes (three subthemes), enablers of collaborative care model (three subthemes), and barriers to collaborative care model (three subthemes). The participants indicated easy access to and communication with competent and pleasant HCPs. The patients appreciated the extra time spent with HCPs, frequent follow-up visits, and health education, which empowered them to self-manage diabetes. HCPs believed that successful CCM provision relied on their interest and commitment to care for patients with diabetes. Generally, participants identified barriers and facilitators that are related to patients, HCPs, and healthcare system.

CONCLUSIONS

The providers and users of CCM had an overall positive perception and appreciation of this model in PHC settings. Barriers to CCM such as undesirable attributes of HCPs and patients, unsupportive hospital system, and high workload must be addressed before implementing the model in other PHC settings.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends.

METHODS

The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision.

RESULTS

Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

The diagnosis and management of diabetes in Australia: Does the "Rule of Halves" apply?

The Rule of Halves (ROH) is a theoretical framework which states that roughly half of all people with a condition are diagnosed; half of those diagnosed receive care; half of those who receive care achieve their treatment targets; and half of those who reach their targets achieve the desired treatment outcomes. This review examined the applicability of the ROH to diabetes in Australia. Five databases were searched for articles and government reports published between January 2000 and August 2019. Data was extracted for each level of the framework, and pooled sample proportions calculated for the total population and sub-group analysis by ethnicity and type of diabetes. The results showed that 72% of people with diabetes are diagnosed. Approximately 50% are receiving standard care, and 40-60% are meeting treatment targets for HbA1c, blood pressure and lipid levels. Overall, Australia is doing better than the ROH when it comes to achieving treatment outcomes; prevalence of microvascular complications was 20-30% and cardiovascular disease 62%. Indigenous people were less likely to meet treatment targets and more likely to experience adverse complications of diabetes. This review indicates the ROH does generally apply for diabetes care and management in Australia, highlighting the need for further improvement.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends.

METHODS

The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision.

RESULTS

Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends.

METHODS

The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision.

RESULTS

Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Interprofessional collaboration and the care and management of type 2 diabetic patients in the Middle East: A systematic review

The World Health Organization has ranked the Middle East (ME) as the second most prevalent region globally for type 2 diabetes. Currently, treatment options initiated by physicians focus mainly on pharmaceuticals; however, lifestyle factors also have a tremendous impact on a patient's wellness or illness. A potential solution to this issue is to use an interprofessional team approach when caring for this patient population. The purpose of this systematic review is to look at the present literature involving the use of an interprofessional team approach to the care and maintenance of people with type 2 diabetes in the ME. A PRISMA flow diagram demonstrates the authors' literature search and screening process. The systematic review includes nine studies with mixed-methodologies performed in the Middle Eastern region in an outpatient or primary care setting, and demonstrates the use of interprofessional collaboration when providing care for type 2 diabetic patients. A meta-analysis was not included due to the heterogeneity of the studies; however, data analysis is discussed and results are demonstrated through an extraction tool developed by the authors based on The Cochrane Collaboration's data collection form. The aim of this review is to construct meaning surrounding the use and effectiveness of this collaborative approach with the adult and geriatric Middle Eastern diabetic patient population. Recommendations include continued support from multiple healthcare professions, involving nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, and physicians to promote holistic and patient-centred-care leading to fewer type 2 diabetes complications and hospital admissions.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends.

Methods

The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision.

Results

Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes.

Conclusion

Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Standardized Follow-Ups Lower HbA1c in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Living in a Rural Community: A Pilot Study

Aim:

To implement and evaluate the use of a standardized process, which includes the teach-back method for follow-up among patients with type 2 diabetes in rural health care settings in order to reduce glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in adults with diabetes.

Background:

It remains unclear whether or not controlled patient follow-up among patients with type 2 diabetes between office visits (at 3-month intervals) is effective in reducing their HbA1c.

Method:

This study recruited 12 participants from a rural health family practice in Northern Illinois to participate in a pretest–posttest study to evaluate if close patient follow-up with reinforced education was effective in helping patients reduce their HbA1c.

Results:

The preintervention for HbA1c and postintervention HbA1c mean difference was found to be statistically significant. The HbA1c level decreased from preintervention to postintervention (p < .05). Further, the mean and standard deviation from the preintervention for HbA1c and postintervention HbA1c were used to calculate an effect size using Cohen’s d found that there was a medium to large effect size d = .67. The change in HbA1c levels was of clinical significance as well as statistical significance.

Conclusion:

The use of a standardized process for patient follow-up as part of routine management of type 2 diabetes appears to have had a clinically as well as statistically significant impact in reducing HbA1c levels.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

This article was copublished in Diabetes Care 2017;40:1409-1419 and The Diabetes Educator 2017;43:449-464 and is reprinted with permission. The previous version of this article, also copublished in Diabetes Care and The Diabetes Educator, can be found at Diabetes Care 2012;35:2393-2401 (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-1707).

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

Purpose The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. Methods The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. Results Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. Conclusion Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

The Treatment of Comorbid Anxiety in a Male With Poorly Controlled Diabetes in a Very Remote Primary Health Care Service

Rural Australians are shown to have poorer health and mental-health outcomes compared with their metropolitan counterparts, particularly for diabetes. Individuals with diabetes often meet criteria for comorbid mental-health conditions, such as anxiety and depression. Psychological treatment, as an adjunct to medical care, for individuals with diabetes is shown to improve overall health and wellbeing. This article describes a 38-year-old male who was referred to a very remote primary health care service by his diabetes educator for strategies to reduce work-related stress and improve his diabetes mismanagement. Mindfulness-based cognitive behavior therapy techniques were used, over six sessions, in the context of a rural and very remote community. Pre- and post-intervention measures showed a reduction in anxiety, distress, and improvement in his perception of his quality of life. Clinical implications for psychological treatment of diabetes and comorbid mental-health issues in rural and remote communities are discussed.

Does the shortage of diabetes specialists in regional and rural Australia matter? Results from Diabetes MILES--Australia

AIM

To investigate differences in access to services and health outcomes between people living with Type 1 (T1DM) and Type 2 (T2DM) diabetes in rural/regional and metropolitan areas.

METHODS

Diabetes MILES--Australia was a national postal/online survey of persons registered with the National Diabetes Services Scheme. Selected variables, including utilisation of health care services and self-care indicators, were analysed for 3338 respondents with T1DM (41%) or T2DM (59%).

RESULTS

Respondents from rural/regional (n=1574, 48%) and metropolitan areas were represented equally (n=1700, 52%). After adjusting for diabetes duration, demographic and socioeconomic variables, rural/regional respondents with T1DM (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.97) and T2DM (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.81) were less likely to report consulting an endocrinologist during the past 12 months. Rural/regional respondents with T1DM were more than twice as likely to have accessed a community/practice nurse for diabetes care (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.25-3.93) while those with T2DM were more likely to have accessed a diabetes educator (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.07-1.36) or dietician (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07-1.36). For the T1DM and T2DM groups were no differences between rural/regional and metropolitan respondents in self-reported hypoglycaemic events during past week and the majority of self-care indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a lack of access to medical specialists, respondents with T1DM and T2DM living in rural/regional areas did not report worse health or self-care indicators. The results suggest that multidisciplinary primary services in rural areas may be providing additional care for people with diabetes, compensating for poor access to specialists.