Username


Password

Forgot Password?

Preview

Sign-in free and Explore the Exciting World of BiomedExperts:
  • Over 1,800,000 Profiles
  • More than 3,500 Organizations worldwide
  • State of the Art Network Visualizations
  • Manage your own Profile
  • Locate Experts in your Country/Region
  • Locate Experts in your 1. and 2. Level Network
  • Connect to Experts Worldwide
2003Ilag Liza L; Martin Catherine L; Tabaei Bahman P; Isaman Deanna J M; Burke Ray; Greene Douglas A; Herman William H
Improving diabetes processes of care in managed care.
Diabetes care 2003;26(10):2722-7.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of systematic patient evaluation and patient and provider feedback on the processes and intermediate outcomes of diabetes care in Independent Practice Association model internal medicine practices. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Nine practices providing care to managed care patients were randomly assigned as intervention or comparison sites. Intervention-site subjects had Annual Diabetes Assessment Program (ADAP) assessments (HbA(1c), blood pressure, lipids, smoking, retinal photos, urine microalbumin, and foot examination) at years 1 and 2. Comparison-site subjects had ADAP assessments at year 2. At Intervention sites, year 1 ADAP results were reviewed with subjects, mailed to providers, and incorporated into electronic medical records with guideline-generated suggestions for treatment and follow-up. Medical records were evaluated for both groups for the year before both the year 1 and year 2 ADAP assessments. Processes and intermediate outcomes were compared using linear and logistic mixed hierarchical models. RESULTS: Of 284 eligible subjects, 103 of 173 (60%) at the Intervention sites and 71 of 111 (64%) at the comparison sites participated; 83 of 103 (81%) of the intervention-site subjects returned for follow-up at year 2. Performance of the six recommended assessments improved in intervention-site subjects at year 2 compared with year 1 (5.8 vs. 4.3, P = 0.0001) and compared with comparison-site subjects at year 2 (4.2, P = 0.014). No significant changes were noted in intermediate outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The ADAP significantly improved processes of care but not intermediate outcomes. Additional interventions are needed to improve intermediate outcomes.

Post to CiteULike

Sign in free and see...

Visualized networks:
See your personal network in
sophisticated graphical views
GeoTargeted Searches:
Locate experts around the world
and connect with global collaborators
Research Profiles:
See the visualized research activity
of experts around the globe
Sign-in to see more