Research CMAJBackground: Group medical visits, whereby health care professionals meet with groups of patients who have the same disease, have been introduced in primary care as a way to meet the increasing demand for health care delivery to patients with chronic diseases. We performed a systematic review and metaanalysis of the evidence on the effectiveness of such visits for patients with diabetes. Methods:We conducted a systematic review of all relevant studies published from 1947 to February 2012 identified in a search of electronic databases and grey literature. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published in English that included patients aged 16-80 years with type 1 or 2 diabetes and that had group medical visits as the intervention. These studies were assessed for methodologic quality.We included data only from the RCTs in the meta-analysis. Results:Of the 94 studies identified, we selected 26 that met our inclusion criteria, 13 of which were RCTs. Group medical visits had a positive effect on clinical and patient-reported outcomes, with significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA 1c reduction −0.46%, 95% confidence interval −0.80% to −0.31%). We were unable to assess the effect of group medical visits on processes of care because of an insufficient number of RCTs that reported on this outcome.Interpretation: Group medical visits for pa tients with diabetes were found to be effective in terms of reducing HbA 1c . The results of our metaanalysis suggest that wider implementation of group medical visits for patients with diabetes will have a positive effect on patient outcomes. Abstract
The number of people with diabetes is expected to rise to over 592 million by the year 2035. Past work provides evidence that the conventional method of primary care delivery may not meet many patients' needs. An alternative to the conventional one-on-one appointment is care offered to a group of patients through group medical visits (GMVs). Group medical visits for diabetes have a positive impact on physiologic and self-care outcomes including improved HbA1c, blood pressure control and self-management skills. Less work has examined the impacts of GMVs on systems of care; however, evidence suggests improved primary and secondary prevention strategies and the potential for GMVs to decrease emergency room visits and hospitalizations. Additional work is needed to examine the effect of GMVs on patient reported quality of life, functional health status and cost-savings. Further work is also needed on which patients GMVs work best for and patient barriers to attending GMVs.
In Canada, increasing numbers of people with chronic conditions have prompted calls for innovative approaches to delivering primary care. These approaches may include group medical visits (GMVs) and the introduction of nurse practitioners (NPs). We examined why NPs in the province of British Columbia were not using GMVs. This case study is part of a larger research project that examined the impact of GMVs with NPs for patients with chronic conditions. We completed open-ended interviews with seven NPs working in primary care. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Data were analyzed using interpretive descriptive approaches. Three major themes emerged: (a) advantages of GMVs, (b) questioning the fit of GMVs in current practice contexts, and (c) navigating scope of practice and role constraints that affect NPs' ability to use GMVs. Power dynamics and hierarchies may influence NPs' ability to adapt to GMVs. Consideration of practice environments and structures that enable the NPs ability to diffuse and utilize health-care innovative care delivery methods is needed.
ObjectiveIn Canada, primary care reform has encouraged innovations, including nurse practitioners (NPs) and group medical visits (GMVs). NP‐led GMVs provide an opportunity to examine barriers and enablers to implementing this innovation in primary care.DesignAn instrumental case study design (n=3): two cases where NPs were using GMVs and one case where NPs were not using GMVs, was completed. In‐depth interviews with patients and providers (N=24) and 10 hours of direct observation were completed. Interpretive descriptive methods were used to analyse data.Results/FindingsTwo main themes were identified: (i) acquisition of knowledge and (ii) GMVs help shift relationships between patients and health‐care providers. Participants discussed how patients and providers learn from one another to facilitate self‐management of chronic conditions. They also discussed how the GMV shifts inherent power differentials between providers and between patients and providers.DiscussionNP‐led GMVs are a method of care delivery that harness NPs’ professional agency through increased leadership and interprofessional collaboration. GMVs also facilitate an environment that is patient‐centred and interprofessional, providing patients with increased confidence to manage their chronic conditions. The GMV provides the opportunity to meet both team‐based and patient‐centred health‐care objectives and may disrupt inherent power differentials that exist in primary care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.