Diabetes care provision in UK primary care practices

Quality of care for chronic conditions: identifying specificities of quality aims based on scoping review and Delphi survey

There is a growing need to implement high quality chronic care to address the global burden of chronic conditions. However, to our knowledge, there have been no systematic attempts to define and specify aims for chronic care quality. To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review and Delphi survey to establish and validate comprehensive specifications. The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) quality of care definition and aims were used as the foundation. We purposively selected articles from the scientific (n=48) and grey literature (n=26). We sought papers that acknowledged and unpacked the plurality of quality in chronic care and proposed or utilised frameworks, studied their implementation, or investigated at least two IOM quality care aims and implementation. Articles were analysed both deductively and inductively. The findings were validated through a Delphi survey involving 49 international chronic care experts with varied knowledge of, and experience in, low-and-middle-income countries. Considering the natural history of chronic conditions and the journey of a person with a chronic condition, we defined and identified the aims of chronic care quality. The six IOM aims apply with specific meanings. We identified a seventh aim, continuity, which relates to the issue of chronicity. The group endorsed our specifications and several participants gave contextualised interpretations and concrete examples. Chronic conditions pose specific challenges underscoring the relevance of tailoring quality of care aims. The next steps require a tailored definition and specific aims to improve, measure and assure the quality of chronic care.

Optimizing physician-encounter frequency for type 2 diabetes patients in primary care based on cardiovascular risk assessment: A target trial emulation study

AIM

To investigate whether the physician-encounter interval for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months among those with a calculated 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score of less than 20% without compromising their long-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using territory-wide public electronic medical records in Hong Kong, we emulated a target trial to compare the effectiveness of the physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 versus 2-3 months for T2D patients without prior CVDs and with a predicted risk for CVDs of less than 20% (i.e. those patients not in the high-risk category). Propensity score matching was used to emulate the randomization of participants at baseline, where 42 154 matched individuals were included for analysis. The marginal structural model was applied to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for CVD incidence and all-cause mortality, the incidence rate ratio of secondary and tertiary care utilization, as well as the between-group differences in HbA1c, blood pressure and cholesterol levels.

RESULTS

During a follow-up period of up to 12 (average: 5.1) years, there was no significantly increased risk of CVD in patients with physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 months compared with those patients with physician-encounter intervals of 2-3 months (HR [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 1.01 [0.90, 1.14]; standardized 10-year risk difference [95% CI]: -0.1% [-0.7%, 0.6%]), nor for all-cause mortality (HR: 1.00 [0.84, 1.20]; standardized 10-year risk difference: -0.1% [-0.5%, 0.3%]). Additionally, there was no observable difference in the utilization of secondary and tertiary care or key clinical parameters between these two follow-up frequencies.

CONCLUSIONS

For T2D patients with a calculated 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%, the interval of regular physician encounters can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months without compromising patients' long-term outcomes and saving substantial service resources in primary care.

Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and the Risk of Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disease Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Population-Based Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

The use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors may be associated with an increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease among patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using an active comparator, new-user design. We used data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink to identify patients newly treated with either a DPP-4 inhibitor or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor between January 2013 and December 2020. We fitted Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine stratification weighting to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for incident gallbladder and bile duct disease associated with DPP-4 inhibitors compared to SGLT-2 inhibitors.

RESULTS

DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a 46% increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease (4.3 vs. 3.0 events per 1000 person-years, HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17-1.83). At 6 months and 1 year, 745 and 948 patients, respectively, would need to be treated with DPP-4 inhibitors for one patient to experience a gallbladder or bile duct disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort study, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors, when compared with SGLT-2 inhibitors, was associated with a moderately increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease among patients with type 2 diabetes. This outcome was still quite rare with a high number needed to harm at 6 months and 1 year.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and the risk of lung cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes

We sought to determine whether the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors is associated with a decreased risk of incident lung cancers among patients with type 2 diabetes. We assembled a new-user, active comparator cohort of SGLT-2 inhibitor and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor users using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We fit Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine stratification weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident lung cancer. Crude incidence rates were 0.94 per 1000 person-years among 69 675 SGLT-2 inhibitor users followed for a median of 2.4 years and 1.45 per 1000 person-years among 151 495 DPP-4 inhibitor users followed for a median of 3.7 years. No reduced short-term risk of lung cancer was observed among SGLT-2 inhibitor users after weighting (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77-1.21). Further research with a longer follow-up period may be warranted.

Evidence Synthesis for Complex Interventions Using Meta-Regression Models

A goal of evidence synthesis for trials of complex interventions is to inform the design or implementation of novel versions of complex interventions by predicting expected outcomes with each intervention version. Conventional aggregate data meta-analyses of studies comparing complex interventions have limited ability to provide such information. We argue that evidence synthesis for trials of complex interventions should forgo aspirations of estimating causal effects and instead model the response surface of study results to 1) summarize the available evidence and 2) predict the average outcomes of future studies or in new settings. We illustrate this modeling approach using data from a systematic review of diabetes quality improvement (QI) interventions involving at least 1 of 12 QI strategy components. We specify a series of meta-regression models to assess the association of specific components with the posttreatment outcome mean and compare the results to conventional meta-analysis approaches. Compared with conventional approaches, modeling the response surface of study results can better reflect the associations between intervention components and study characteristics with the posttreatment outcome mean. Modeling study results using a response surface approach offers a useful and feasible goal for evidence synthesis of complex interventions that rely on aggregate data.

Incretin-Based Drugs and the Incidence of Prostate Cancer Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

There is some evidence that glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors have chemopreventive effects on prostate cancer cells, but real-world evidence for this possible effect is lacking. Thus, the objective of this study was to estimate whether use of GLP-1 receptor agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors, separately, is associated with a decreased risk of prostate cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We assembled two new-user, active comparator cohorts using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2007 to 2019). The first cohort included 5063 initiators of GLP-1 receptor agonists and 112,955 of sulfonylureas. The second cohort included 53,529 initiators of DPP-4 inhibitors and 114,417 of sulfonylureas. We fit Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for prostate cancer. We weighted the models using propensity score fine stratification, which considered over 50 potential confounders.

RESULTS

GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with a decreased risk of prostate cancer when compared with sulfonylureas (incidence rates: 156.4 vs. 232.0 per 100,000 person-years, respectively; HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.99). DPP-4 inhibitors were also associated with a decreased risk of prostate cancer when compared with sulfonylureas (incidence rates: 316.2 vs. 350.5 events per 100,000 person-years, respectively; HR: 0.90, CI: 0.81, 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study are consistent with the hypothesis that the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors, separately, may decrease the risk of prostate cancer when compared with the use of sulfonylureas.

Cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based multiple behaviour change intervention aimed at healthcare professionals to improve their management of type 2 diabetes in primary care

Background

National diabetes audits in the UK show room for improvement in the quality of care delivered to people with type 2 diabetes in primary care. Systematic reviews of quality improvement interventions show that such approaches can be effective but there is wide variability between trials and little understanding concerning what explains this variability. A national cohort study of primary care across 99 UK practices identified modifiable predictors of healthcare professionals’ prescribing, advising and foot examination.

Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of an implementation intervention to improve six guideline-recommended health professional behaviours in managing type 2 diabetes in primary care: prescribing for blood pressure and glycaemic control, providing physical activity and nutrition advice and providing updated diabetes education and foot examination.

Methods

Two-armed cluster randomised trial involving 44 general practices. Primary outcomes (at 12 months follow-up): from electronic medical records, the proportion of patients receiving additional prescriptions for blood pressure and insulin initiation for glycaemic control and having a foot examination; and from a patient survey of a random sample of 100 patients per practice, reported receipt of updated diabetes education and physical activity and nutrition advice.

Results

The implementation intervention did not lead to statistically significant improvement on any of the six clinical behaviours. 1,138,105 prescriptions were assessed. Intervention (29% to 37% patients) and control arms (31% to 35%) increased insulin initiation relative to baseline but were not statistically significantly different at follow-up (IRR 1.18, 95%CI 0.95–1.48). Intervention (45% to 53%) and control practices (45% to 50%) increased blood pressure prescription from baseline to follow-up but were not statistically significantly different at follow-up (IRR 1.05, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.16). Intervention (75 to 78%) and control practices (74 to 79%) increased foot examination relative to baseline; control practices increased statistically significantly more (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.75–0.94). Fewer patients in intervention (33%) than control practices (40%) reported receiving updated diabetes education (OR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.57–0.97). No statistically significant differences were observed in patient reports of having had a discussion about nutrition (intervention = 73%; control = 72%; OR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.59–1.64) or physical activity (intervention = 57%; control = 62%; OR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.56–1.11). Development and delivery of the intervention cost £1191 per practice.

Conclusions

There was no measurable benefit to practices’ participation in this intervention. Despite widespread use of outreach interventions worldwide, there is a need to better understand which techniques at which intensity are optimally suited to address the multiple clinical behaviours involved in improving care for type 2 diabetes.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN66498413. Registered April 4, 2013

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0754-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Systematic development of a theory-informed multifaceted behavioural intervention to increase physical activity of adults with type 2 diabetes in routine primary care: Movement as Medicine for Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial evidence for physical activity (PA) as a management option for type 2 diabetes, there remains a lack of PA behavioural interventions suitable for delivery in primary care. This paper describes the systematic development of an evidence-informed PA behavioural intervention for use during routine primary care consultations.

METHODS

In accordance with the Medical Research Council Framework for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions, a four-stage systematic development process was undertaken: (1) exploratory work involving interviews and workshop discussions identified training needs of healthcare professionals and support needs of adults with type 2 diabetes; (2) a systematic review with meta- and moderator analyses identified behaviour change techniques and optimal intervention intensity and duration; (3) usability testing identified strategies to increase implementation of the intervention in primary care and (4) an open pilot study in two primary care practices facilitated intervention optimisation.

RESULTS

Healthcare professional training needs included knowledge about type, intensity and duration of PA sufficient to improve glycaemic control and acquisition of skills to promote PA behaviour change. Patients lacked knowledge about type 2 diabetes and skills to enable them to make sustainable changes to their level of PA. An accredited online training programme for healthcare professionals and a professional-delivered behavioural intervention for adults with type 2 diabetes were subsequently developed. This multifaceted intervention was informed by the theory of planned behaviour and social cognitive theory and consisted of 15 behaviour change techniques. Intervention intensity and duration were informed by a systematic review. Usability testing resolved technical problems with the online training intervention that facilitated use on practice IT systems. An open pilot study of the intervention with fidelity of delivery assessment informed optimisation and identified mechanisms to enhance implementation of the intervention during routine diabetes consultations.

CONCLUSIONS

Movement as Medicine for Type 2 diabetes represents an evidence-informed multifaceted behavioural intervention targeting PA for management of type 2 diabetes developed for delivery in primary care. The structured development process undertaken enhances transparency of intervention content, replicability and scalability. Movement as Medicine for Type 2 diabetes is currently undergoing evaluation in a pilot RCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN67997502.

Impact of the Prevalence of Concordant and Discordant Conditions on the Quality of Diabetes Care in Family Practices in England

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between the prevalence of both diabetes-concordant and diabetes-discordant conditions and the quality of diabetes care at the family practice level in England. We hypothesized that the prevalence of concordant (or discordant) conditions would be associated with better (or worse) quality of diabetes care.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using practice-level data (7,884 practices). We estimated the practice-level prevalence of diabetes and 15 other chronic conditions, which were classified as diabetes concordant (ie, with the same pathophysiologic risk profile and therefore more likely to be part of the same management plan) or diabetes discordant (ie, not directly related in either their pathogenesis or management). We measured quality of diabetes care with diabetes-specific indicators (8 processes and 3 intermediate outcomes of care). We used linear regression models to quantify the effect of the prevalence of the conditions on aggregate achievement rate for quality of diabetes care.

RESULTS

Consistent with the proposed model, the prevalence rates of 4 of 7 concordant conditions (obesity, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, heart failure) were positively associated with quality of diabetes care. Similarly, negative associations were observed as predicted for 2 of the 8 discordant conditions (epilepsy, mental health). Observations for other concordant and discordant conditions did not match predictions in the hypothesized model.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of diabetes care provided in English family practices is associated with the prevalence of other major chronic conditions at the practice level. The nature and direction of the observed associations cannot be fully explained by the concordant-discordant model.

Reflective and automatic processes in health care professional behaviour: a dual process model tested across multiple behaviours

BACKGROUND

Clinicians' behaviours require deliberate decision-making in complex contexts and may involve both impulsive (automatic) and reflective (motivational and volitional) processes.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to test a dual process model applied to clinician behaviours in their management of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

The design used six nested prospective correlational studies. Questionnaires were sent to general practitioners and nurses in 99 UK primary care practices, measuring reflective (intention, action planning and coping planning) and impulsive (automaticity) predictors for six guideline-recommended behaviours: blood pressure prescribing (N = 335), prescribing for glycemic control (N = 288), providing diabetes-related education (N = 346), providing weight advice (N = 417), providing self-management advice (N = 332) and examining the feet (N = 218).

RESULTS

Respondent retention was high. A dual process model was supported for prescribing behaviours, weight advice, and examining the feet. A sequential reflective process was supported for blood pressure prescribing, self-management and weight advice, and diabetes-related education.

CONCLUSIONS

Reflective and impulsive processes predict behaviour. Quality improvement interventions should consider both reflective and impulsive approaches to behaviour change.

Identification, summary and comparison of tools used to measure organizational attributes associated with chronic disease management within primary care settings

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Given the increasing emphasis being placed on managing patients with chronic diseases within primary care, there is a need to better understand which primary care organizational attributes affect the quality of care that patients with chronic diseases receive. This study aimed to identify, summarize and compare data collection tools that describe and measure organizational attributes used within the primary care setting worldwide.

METHODS

Systematic search and review methodology consisting of a comprehensive and exhaustive search that is based on a broad question to identify the best available evidence was employed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 organizational attribute data collection tools that have been used within the primary care setting were identified. The tools varied with respect to overall focus and level of organizational detail captured, theoretical foundations, administration and completion methods, types of questions asked, and the extent to which psychometric property testing had been performed. The tools utilized within the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe study and the Canadian Primary Health Care Practice-Based Surveys were the most recently developed tools. Furthermore, of the 30 tools reviewed, the Canadian Primary Health Care Practice-Based Surveys collected the most information on organizational attributes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need to collect primary care organizational attribute information at a national level to better understand factors affecting the quality of chronic disease prevention and management across a given country. The data collection tools identified in this review can be used to establish data collection strategies to collect this important information.

Improving Diabetes care through Examining, Advising, and prescribing (IDEA): protocol for a theory-based cluster randomised controlled trial of a multiple behaviour change intervention aimed at primary healthcare professionals

Background

New clinical research findings may require clinicians to change their behaviour to provide high-quality care to people with type 2 diabetes, likely requiring them to change multiple different clinical behaviours. The present study builds on findings from a UK-wide study of theory-based behavioural and organisational factors associated with prescribing, advising, and examining consistent with high-quality diabetes care.

Aim

To develop and evaluate the effectiveness and cost of an intervention to improve multiple behaviours in clinicians involved in delivering high-quality care for type 2 diabetes.

Design/methods

We will conduct a two-armed cluster randomised controlled trial in 44 general practices in the North East of England to evaluate a theory-based behaviour change intervention. We will target improvement in six underperformed clinical behaviours highlighted in quality standards for type 2 diabetes: prescribing for hypertension; prescribing for glycaemic control; providing physical activity advice; providing nutrition advice; providing on-going education; and ensuring that feet have been examined. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients appropriately prescribed and examined (using anonymised computer records), and advised (using anonymous patient surveys) at 12 months. We will use behaviour change techniques targeting motivational, volitional, and impulsive factors that we have previously demonstrated to be predictive of multiple health professional behaviours involved in high-quality type 2 diabetes care. We will also investigate whether the intervention was delivered as designed (fidelity) by coding audiotaped workshops and interventionist delivery reports, and operated as hypothesised (process evaluation) by analysing responses to theory-based postal questionnaires. In addition, we will conduct post-trial qualitative interviews with practice teams to further inform the process evaluation, and a post-trial economic analysis to estimate the costs of the intervention and cost of service use.

Discussion

Consistent with UK Medical Research Council guidance and building on previous development research, this pragmatic cluster randomised trial will evaluate the effectiveness of a theory-based complex intervention focusing on changing multiple clinical behaviours to improve quality of diabetes care.

Trial registration

ISRCTN66498413.