Document Detail

Influences on control in diabetes mellitus: patient, doctor, practice, or delivery of care?
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  8461816     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
OBJECTIVE: To assess patient, doctor, practice, and process of care variables for their effect on glycaemic control in diabetes mellitus, and to quantify their relative effects. DESIGN: Search of general practice medical records, patient questionnaires and examination, doctor questionnaire, videotaping and analysis of consultations, and practice questionnaire. SETTING: 12 practices with 32 participating general practitioners in Nottinghamshire. SUBJECTS: 318 patients randomly selected from those with diabetes in each practice, 10 for each participating doctor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Glycaemic control as measured by random glycated haemoglobin A1c estimation (random haemoglobin A1 measurement). RESULTS: Glycaemic control was significantly related to the disease process as measured by years since diagnosis, treatment group, and number of diabetes related clinical events. Females had significantly worse control than males. Other patient factors, such as age, social class, lifestyle, attitudes, satisfaction, and knowledge, had no association with glycaemic control. Of all the doctor factors examined, only doctors who professed a special interest in diabetes achieved significantly better glycaemic control. Bigger and better equipped practices and those with a diabetic miniclinic had patients with significantly better glycaemic control, as did those with access to dietetic advice. Patients attending hospital clinics had worse glycaemic control, but this seemed to be attributable to the case mix and practice characteristics. Shared care did not contribute to the multiple linear regression model. CONCLUSION: Glycaemic control among diabetic patients in the community is related to such factors as treatment group, sex, and years since diagnosis; it is also related to the organisation and process of care. The findings support concentrating diabetic care on partners with special interests in diabetes in well equipped practices with adequate dietetic support.
M Pringle; C Stewart-Evans; C Coupland; I Williams; S Allison; J Sterland
Related Documents :
19723366 - Effectiveness of prevention programmes for obesity and chronic diseases among immigrant...
9304556 - Motivation and glycemic control in diabetes mellitus.
17052356 - Racial/ethnic and social class differences in preventive care practices among persons w...
17672906 - Validation of two generic patient-reported outcome measures in patients with type 2 dia...
15699516 - Establishment of native insulin-negative nod mice and the methodology to distinguish sp...
25093156 - Obesity and kidney protection.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't    
Journal Detail:
Title:  BMJ (Clinical research ed.)     Volume:  306     ISSN:  0959-8138     ISO Abbreviation:  BMJ     Publication Date:  1993 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  1993-05-06     Completed Date:  1993-05-06     Revised Date:  2010-03-24    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8900488     Medline TA:  BMJ     Country:  ENGLAND    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  630-4     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
University of Nottingham Medical School, Queen's Medical Centre.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Attitude of Health Personnel
Diabetes Mellitus / blood,  prevention & control*,  therapy
Family Practice
Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated / analysis*
Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)*
Patient Care Planning
Patient Compliance
Professional Practice
Random Allocation
Treatment Outcome
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated
Comment In:
BMJ. 1993 Apr 24;306(6885):1123   [PMID:  8338583 ]
BMJ. 1993 Apr 24;306(6885):1123   [PMID:  8495163 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Prompting the clinical care of non-insulin dependent (type II) diabetic patients in an inner city ar...
Next Document:  Community care and the fundholder.