Impact of an integrated care program on glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia: an interventional parallel-group controlled study

Abstract

BackgroundLong intervals between patient visits and limited time with patients can result in clinical inertia and suboptimal achievement of treatment goals. These obstacles can be improved with a multidisciplinary care program. The present study aimed to assess the impact of such a program on glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors.MethodsIn a randomized, parallel-group trial, we assigned 263 patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to either a control group, standard care program, or a multidisciplinary care program involving a senior family physician, clinical pharmacy specialist, dietician, diabetic educator, health educator, and social worker. The participants were followed for a median of 10 months, between September 2013 and September 2014. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), lipid profiles, and blood pressure (BP) were measured. The assignment was blinded for the assessors of the study outcomes. The study registry number is.ResultsIn the intervention group, there were statistically significant (p < 0.05) post-intervention (relative) reductions in the levels of HbA1c (−27.1%, 95% CI = −28.9%, −25.3%), FBG (−17.10%, 95% CI = −23.3%, −10.9%), total cholesterol (−9.93%, 95% CI = −12.7%, −7.9%), LDL cholesterol (−11.4%, 95% CI = −19.4%, −3.5%), systolic BP (−1.5%, 95% CI = −2.9%, −0.03%), and diastolic BP (−3.4%, 95% CI = −5.2%, −1.7%). There was a significant decrease in the number of patients with a HbA1c ≥10 (86 mmol/mol) from 167 patients at enrollment to 11 patients after intervention (p < 0.001). However, the intervention group experienced a statistically significant increase in body weight (3.7%, 95% CI = 2.9%, 4.5%). In the control group, no statistically significant changes were noticed in different outcomes with the exception of total cholesterol (−4.10%, p = 0.07). In the linear regression model, the intervention and the total number of clinic visits predicted HbA1c improvement.ConclusionsImplementation of a patient-specific integrated care program involving a multidisciplinary team approach, frequent clinic visits, and intensified insulin treatment was associated with marked improvement in glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors of poorly controlled T2DM patients in a safe and reproducible manner.Trial registrationISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN83437562 September 19, 2016 Retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-017-0677-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Trends and characteristics of enrolment in the National Health Insurance Scheme in Ghana: a quantitative analysis of longitudinal data

“…The faith-based facilities, however are mainly concentrated in the rural areas where government or public healthcare facilities are limited. There are predominantly large numbers of healthcare facilities and professionals in the urbanised regions of the country [ 44 , 45 ].…”

Identifying subgroups of high-need, high-cost, chronically ill patients in primary care: A latent class analysis

“…Further research, in particular qualitative inquiry, is necessary to identify the most important concerns and components of health care per HNHC subgroup. In addition, the current study has focused on HNHC patients in primary care, which is widely considered the most suitable medical home for chronically ill patients [57]. Although as a result, our findings are mainly useful for improvement of primary care management, there is some evidence that patients with a disproportionately high use of primary care resources also account for significantly high(er) costs in specialist care [58,59].…”

Multidimensional Geriatric Assessment with MAGIC Questionnaire and Quality of Life in Elderly Primary Care Patients

“…A systematic review of the scales incorporating patients’ perspectives, and not only the quantification of clinical parameters assessed by professionals, shows that there is currently no instrument that comprehensively covers all the outcomes frequently sought in PC [ 18 ].…”