Catherine S. Barnes

Patient adherence improves glycemic control

Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of appointment keeping and medication adherence on HbA1c. Methods A retrospective evaluation was performed in 1560 patients with type 2 diabetes who presented for a new visit to the Grady Diabetes Clinic between 1991 and 2001 and returned for a follow-up visit and HbA1c after 1 year of care. Appointment keeping was assessed by the number of scheduled intervening visits that were kept, and medication adherence was assessed by the percentage of visits in which self-reported diabetes medication use was as recommended at the preceding visit. Results The patients had an average age of 55 years, body mass index (BMI) of 32 kg/m2, diabetes duration of 4.6 years, and baseline HbA1c of 9.1%. Ninety percent were African American, and 63% were female. Those who kept more intervening appointments had lower HbA1c levels after 12 months of care (7.6% with 6-7 intervening visits vs 9.7% with 0 intervening visits). Better medication adherence was also associated with lower HbA1c levels after 12 months of care (7.8% with 76%-100% adherence). After adjusting for age, gender, race, BMI, diabetes duration, and diabetes therapy in multivariate linear regression analysis, the benefits of appointment keeping and medication adherence remained significant and contributed independently; the HbA1c was 0.12% lower for every additional intervening appointment that was kept (P= .0001) and 0.34% lower for each quartile of better medication adherence (P= .0009). Conclusion Keeping more appointments and taking diabetes medications as directed were associated with substantial improvements in HbA1c. Efforts to enhance glycemic outcomes should include emphasis on these simple but critically important aspects of patient adherence.

Clinical Inertia Contributes to Poor Diabetes Control in a Primary Care Setting

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether “clinical inertia”—inadequate intensification of therapy by the provider—could contribute to high A1C levels in patients with type 2 diabetes managed in a primary care site. Methods In a prospective observational study, management was compared in the Medical Clinic, a primary care site supervised by general internal medicine faculty, and the Diabetes Clinic, a specialty site supervised by endocrinologists. These municipal hospital clinics serve a common population that is largely African American, poor, and uninsured. Results Four hundred thirty-eight African American patients in the Medical Clinic and 2157 in the Diabetes Clinic were similar in average age, diabetes duration, body mass index, and gender, but A1C averaged 8.6% in the Medical Clinic versus 7.7% in the Diabetes Clinic (P < .0001). Use of pharmacotherapy was less intensive in the Medical Clinic (less use of insulin), and when patients had elevated glucose levels during clinic visits, therapy was less than half as likely to be advanced in the Medical Clinic compared to the Diabetes Clinic (P < .0001). Intensification rates were lower in the Medical Clinic regardless of type of therapy (P < .0001), and intensification of therapy was independently associated with improvement in A1C (P < .001). Conclusions Medical Clinic patients had worse glycemic control, were less likely to be treated with insulin, and were less likely to have their therapy intensified if glucose levels were elevated. To improve diabetes management and glycemic control nationwide, physicians in training and generalists must learn to overcome clinical inertia, to intensify therapy when appropriate, and to use insulin when clinically indicated.

Patient Activation Is Associated With Healthy Behaviors and Ease in Managing Diabetes in an Indigent Population

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the validity of the patient activation construct as measured by the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) survey by correlating PAM scores with diabetes self-management behaviors, attitudes, and knowledge in a predominantly minority and uninsured population. Methods A convenience sample of patients presenting to an urban public hospital diabetes clinic was surveyed and contacted by phone 6 months later. The survey included questions about activation, health behaviors, and health care utilization. Results A total of 287 patients agreed to participate. Most were African American, female, and uninsured. Most respondents (62.2%) scored in the highest category of activation according to the PAM. Activated patients were more likely to perform feet checks, receive eye examinations, and exercise regularly. Activation was consistently associated with less reported difficulty in managing diabetes care but not with A1C knowledge. PAM scores at the initial interview were highly correlated with scores at 6-month follow-up. Activation level did not predict differences in health care utilization during the 6 months following the survey. Conclusions Higher scores on the PAM were associated with higher rates of self-care behaviors and ease in managing diabetes; however, the indigent urban population reported higher activation scores than found in previous studies. The relationship between activation and outcomes needs to be explored further prior to expanding use of this measure in this patient population.

Perception of Barriers to Self-care Management Among Diabetic Patients

Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore individual, educational, and system barriers that limit low-income diabetes patients’ ability to achieve optimal diabetes self-management. Methods Economically disadvantaged patients with diabetes who used the Diabetes Clinic of Grady Health System in Atlanta, Georgia, participated in 3 focus group discussions. Results The discussions were held with mostly African Americans (n = 35) to explore barriers to achieving optimal diabetes self-management. Most participants were not married, approximately one-third had less than high school level reading skills, and 40% were not currently working. In terms of individual barriers, the emotional toll from the diagnosis of and lifestyle changes to treat diabetes was a recurrent theme, and included stress, frustration, social isolation, interpersonal conflicts, depression, and fear. Denial was often mentioned as the key factor that inhibited adherence to a healthy mode of living. The educational barriers were failure to recognize the risks and consequences of an asymptomatic condition. Many participants did not understand A1C. Finally, several system barriers were identified. The participants identified needed services, including follow-up and refresher courses, support group discussions, nutrition and medication education, availability of different education modalities, and expanded clinic hours. Conclusions The focus group discussions identified both barriers to diabetes management and opportunities for improving care for underserved patients with diabetes. The results are useful to improve the delivery of care and to develop quantitative studies to explore particular areas of interest. Based on these results, the current system needs to provide more support and education to patients with diabetes.

Little Time for Diabetes Management in the Primary Care Setting

PURPOSE This study was conducted to determine how time is allocated to diabetes care. METHODS Patients with type 2 diabetes who were receiving care from the internal medicine residents were shadowed by research nurses to observe the process of management. The amount of time spent with patients and the care provided were observed and documented. RESULTS The total time patients spent in the clinic averaged 2 hours and 26 minutes: 1 to 9 minutes waiting, 25 minutes with the resident, and 12 minutes with medical assistants and nurses. The residents spent an average of only 5 minutes on diabetes. Glucose monitoring was addressed in 70% of visits; a history of hypoglycemia was sought in only 30%. Blood pressure values were mentioned in 75% of visits; hemoglobin A1c (A1C) values were addressed in only 40%. The need for proper foot care was discussed in 55% of visits; feet were examined in only 40%. Although 65% of patients had capillary glucose levels greater than 150 mg/dL during the visit and their A1C averaged 8.9%, therapy was intensified for only 15% of patients. CONCLUSIONS During a routine office visit in a resident-staffed general medicine clinic, little time is devoted to diabetes management. Given the time pressures on the primary care practitioner and the need for better diabetes care, it is essential to teach an efficient but systematic approach to diabetes care.

The Improving Primary Care of African Americans with Diabetes (IPCAAD) project: rationale and design

African Americans have an increased burden of both diabetes and diabetes complications. Since many patients have high glucose levels novel interventions are needed, especially for urban patients with limited resources. In the Grady Diabetes Clinic in Atlanta, a stepped care strategy improves metabolic control. However, most diabetes patients do not receive specialized care. We will attempt to translate diabetes clinic approaches to the primary care setting by implementing a novel partnership between specialists and generalists. We hypothesize that endocrinologist-supported strategies aimed at providers will result in effective diabetes management in primary care sites, and the Improving Primary Care of African Americans with Diabetes project will test this hypothesis in a major randomized, controlled trial involving over 2000 patients. Physicians in Grady Medical Clinic units will receive (1) usual care, (2) computerized reminders that recommend individualized changes in therapy and/or (3) directed discussion by endocrinologists providing feedback on performance. We will measure outcomes related to both microvascular disease (HbA1c, which reflects average glucose levels over an approximately 2-month period) and macrovascular disease (blood pressure and lipids) and assess provider performance as well. We will compare two readily generalizable program interventions that should delineate approaches effective in a primary care setting as needed to improve care and prevent complications in urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes.

Use of a Glucose Algorithm to Direct Diabetes Therapy Improves A1C Outcomes and Defines an Approach to Assess Provider Behavior

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether an algorithm that recommended individualized changes in therapy would help providers to change therapy appropriately and improve glycemic control in their patients. Methods The algorithm recommended specific doses of oral agents and insulin based on a patients medications and glucose or A1C levels at the time of the visit. The prospective observational study analyzed the effect of the algorithm on treatment decisions and A1C levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. Results The study included 1250 patients seen in pairs of initial and follow-up visits during a 7-month baseline and/or a subsequent 7-month algorithm period. The patients had a mean age of 62 years, body mass index of 33 kg/m2, duration of diabetes of 10 years, were 94% African American and 71% female, and had average initial A1C level of 7.7%. When the algorithm was available, providers were 45% more likely to intensify therapy when indicated (P = .005) and increased therapy by a 20% greater amount (P < .001). A1C level at follow-up was 90% more likely to be <7% in the algorithm group, even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, body mass index, race, duration of diabetes and therapy, glucose, and A1C level at the initial visit (P < .001). Conclusions Use of an algorithm that recommends patient-specific changes in diabetes medications improves both provider behavior and patient A1C levels and should allow quantitative evaluation of provider actions for that providers patients.

Medication reconciliation: comparing a customized medication history form to a standard medication form in a specialty clinic (CAMPII 2).

Background Medication history forms completed by patients are an essential part of the medication reconciliation process. Objective In a crossover prospective study, investigators compared the accuracy and acceptability of a “fill-in-the blank” medication history form (USUAL) to a customized form (CUSTOM) that contained a checklist of the 44 most frequently prescribed diabetes clinic medications. Methods The content of both forms was compared to a “gold-standard” medication list compiled by a clinical pharmacist who conducted a medication history and reviewed pharmacy profiles and medical chart. Subject preference and time to complete the forms were also determined. Accurate was defined as complete and correct (name, dose, and frequency) relative to the gold standard. Results A total of 77 subjects completed both forms. Complete list accuracy was poor; there was no difference in the accuracy between CUSTOM (6.5%) and USUAL (9.1%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.33; P = 0.62). Out of a total of 648 medications, subjects accurately listed 43.7% of medications on CUSTOM and 45.5% on USUAL (OR, 0.88; P = 0.41). The 44 medications on the checklist were more than twice as likely to be accurately reported using CUSTOM than with USUAL (OR, 2.1; P = 0.0002). More subjects preferred CUSTOM (65.7%) compared with USUAL (32.8%, P = 0.007). Conclusion Medication self-report is very poor, and few subjects created an accurate list on either form. Subjects were more likely to report the drugs on the checklist using CUSTOM than when they used USUAL; however, there was no difference in the overall accuracy between CUSTOM and USUAL.

267 THIRTEEN YEARS OF DIABETES MANAGEMENT IN A MUNICIPAL HOSPITAL SYSTEM.

Since poor glycemic control is a particular problem for ethnic minority patients in urban environments, the Grady Diabetes Clinic has attempted to improve outcomes by emphasizing both regular assessment and aggressive management by providers. To evaluate the impact of this quality improvement program, we reviewed care in this setting between 4/1/1991 and 12/31/2004. 10,874 patients with type 2 diabetes and first visits to the clinic had an average age of 52 yrs, BMI of 33 kg/m2, and diabetes duration of 5.2 yrs. Sixty-one percent were female and 89% were African American. A1c at presentation fell from 9.0% in 1991 to 8.3% in 2004 (p < .0001). Provider management during the first year of follow-up care improved significantly over time: intensification of therapy when indicated increased from 21% in 1991 to 61% in 2004 and the degree of intensification increased from 17% of our current recommendations in 1991 to 84% in 2004 (p < .0001 for both trends). This improvement in provider behavior was associated with lower A1c levels in the 3,405 patients who returned for follow-up visits after 1 year of care as evidenced by a fall in A1c from 8.1% in 1991 to 7.2% in 2004 (p < .0001 for trend). Patient adherence to medications (mean Å88% of recommended; 93% in 1991 to 69% in 2004) and appointments (mean 4.0 per year; 4.6 in 1991 to 3.0 in 2004) was relatively high throughout the 12-year period but showed a significant downward trend over time (p < .0001). In multivariable linear regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, race, duration of diabetes, year of presentation, initial A1c, and patient adherence, the magnitude of provider intensification was significantly associated with a greater fall in A1c over 1 year of care (p < .0001). Conclusions In a municipal hospital diabetes clinic, self-assessment strategies improved provider behavior significantly over 13 years, in association with better glycemic control—close to ADA goals. Translating these approaches to enhance diabetes care across the US may require a similar emphasis on evaluation and improvement of management by providers.