Use of outcomes in monitoring healthcare - how many outcome measures are needed in monitoring diabetes 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.

The novel use of commonly captured data to assess a district's diabetes service that encompasses both primary and secondary care

AIM

To identify commonly captured data in the UK to look at the performance of a district's diabetes care that encompasses both primary and secondary care.

METHODS

Primary care quality outcomes framework (QOF) measures for diabetes, referral rates for first appointment for specialist secondary care and emergency admission rates for diabetes (Dr Foster/HES) were used to produce a performance index scoring system. Illustrative measures from QOF were total diabetes points, DM23 attainment of HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) and its exemption rate (number of patients excluded from analysis). The performance index was used to study the effectiveness of the Medway district diabetes service and this was compared to another district (Guildford) within the same Strategic Health Authority and nationally.

RESULTS

Medway has the highest prevalence of Diabetes (6.1%) of the 8 Primary Care Trusts examined, the lowest achievement of diabetes QOF points (96.1%) and the lowest achievement of an HbA1c level <7% (53 mmol/mol) (54.3%). Exemption reporting was the 3rd highest. SAR for first diabetes out-patient appointment to the hospital was low at 281 (predicted 576) 48% of expected. The emergency admission rate was high at 225 (predicted 168) 133% of expected. Thus primary care diabetes needs to raise performance and implement a lower threshold for OPD referral to prevent emergency admissions.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to produce an assessment of diabetes care that transcends primary/secondary care that gives a true reflection of a district's performance which will be useful to plan future health service provision.