Quality of Care for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care in Norway Is Improving

Abstract

OBJECTIVE -To assess changes in the quality of care in Norway for patients with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS -Between 1995 and 2005, there were significant improvements in the proportion of patients for whom important laboratory analyses, smoking habits, height, weight, and referral to eye examination were recorded. Mean A1C declined from 7.74 to 7.15%, systolic blood pressure from 150.0 to 140.4 mmHg, and cholesterol from 6.28 to 5.0 mmol/l (P Ͻ 0.001, age and sex adjusted). The 10-year risk of coronary heart disease for an average male patient declined from 42 to 29%. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSCONCLUSIONS -There have been substantial improvements in type 2 diabetes primary care in Norway that are potentially related to major improvements in health outcomes. Diabetes Care 32:81-83, 2009

Quality of care for type 2 diabetes mellitus in Tripoli Medical Center: a retrospective study of 628 patients

“…570 (90.8%) of our patients had their BP documented, this rate is comparable to other studies, where more than 85% of patients attending the diabetic clinic had their blood pressure checked regularly [22,23,30,39].…”

“…Despite the broadly distributed diabetes care guidelines, which give clear recommendations to the glycemic, blood pressure and lipid targets in diabetic patients, several studies have indicated that achievement of these targets is suboptimal [22][23][24][25].…”

“…The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends a set of diabetic care standards that advocate aggressive management of hyperglycemia, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia for patients with diabetes [21]. Despite the publication of the ADA and other guidelines, several studies have reported suboptimal target achievement and care provided to people with diabetes based on evidence-based quality of care standards [22,23].…”

Bruk av skjema i oppfølgingen av diabetes i allmennpraksis

“…Det at vi fant få studier er i seg selv interessant og understreker at vi mangler data for å konkludere sikkert om hvorvidt bruk av strukturerte skjemaer er et kostnadseffektivt tiltak. Til denne kategorien hører også NOKLUS-skjemaet (6).…”

“…Dette er ment å vaere både et klinisk verktøy for allmennlegen og et innsamlingsverktøy for Norsk diabetesregister (6). Det foreligger flere systematiske oversikter om effekten av ulike tiltak i diabetesoppfølgingen, men ingen omhandler spesifikt bruken av skjemaer for registrering av kliniske data (7).…”