Search

Objective: An association between variability in clinical parameters (HbA 1c , blood pressure, cholesterol, and uric acid) and risk of complications in type 2 diabetes has been reported. In this analysis, we investigated to what extent such variability is associated with overall quality of care., Research Design and Methods: The quality of care summary score (Q-score) represents a validated, overall quality of care indicator ranging between 0 and 40; the higher the score, the better the quality of care provided by the diabetes center. We identified patients with five or more measurements of clinical parameters after the assessment of the Q-score. Multiple linear regression analyses assessed the role of the Q-score in predicting the variability of the different parameters., Results: Overall, 273,888 patients were analyzed. The variability of all the parameters systematically increased with decreasing Q-score values. At multivariate linear regression analysis, compared with a Q-score >25, a score <15 was associated with a significantly larger variation in HbA 1c , blood pressure, uric acid, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol and a lower variation in HDL cholesterol. The analysis of standardized β coefficients show that the Q-score has a larger impact on the variability of HbA 1c (0.34; P < 0.0001), systolic blood pressure (0.21; P < 0.0001), total cholesterol (0.21; P < 0.0001), and LDL cholesterol (0.20; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: The variability of risk factors for diabetic complications is associated with quality of care. Quality of care improvement initiatives should be targeted to increase the achievement of the recommended target while reducing such variability., (© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: To investigate the quality of type 2 diabetes care according to sex., Research Design and Methods: Clinical data collected during the year 2009 were extracted from electronic medical records; quality-of-care indicators were evaluated. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was applied to estimate the likelihood of women versus men to be monitored for selected parameters, to reach clinical outcomes, and to be treated with specific classes of drugs. The intercenter variability in the proportion of men and women achieving the targets was also investigated., Results: Overall, 415,294 patients from 236 diabetes outpatient centers were evaluated, of whom 188,125 (45.3%) were women and 227,169 (54.7%) were men. Women were 14% more likely than men to have HbA1c>9.0% in spite of insulin treatment (odds ratio 1.14 [95% CI 1.10-1.17]), 42% more likely to have LDL cholesterol (LDL-C)≥130 mg/dL (1.42 [1.38-1.46]) in spite of lipid-lowering treatment, and 50% more likely to have BMI≥30 kg/m2 (1.50 [1.50-1.54]). Women were less likely to be monitored for foot and eye complications. In 99% of centers, the percentage of men reaching the LDL-C target was higher than in women, the proportion of patients reaching the HbA1c target was in favor of men in 80% of the centers, and no differences emerged for blood pressure., Conclusions: Women show a poorer quality of diabetes care than men. The attainment of the LDL-C target seems to be mainly related to pathophysiological factors, whereas patient and physician attitudes can play an important role in other process measures and outcomes.

Objective: The QUASAR (Quality Assessment Score and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Italian Diabetes Patients) study aimed to assess whether a quality-of-care summary score predicted the development of cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with type 2 diabetes., Research Design and Methods: In 67 diabetes clinics, data on randomly selected patients were extracted from electronic medical records. The score was calculated using process and outcome indicators based on monitoring, targets, and treatment of A1C, blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, and microalbuminuria. The score ranged from 0 to 40., Results: Overall, 5,181 patients were analyzed; 477 (9.2%) patients developed a CV event after a median follow-up of 28 months. The incidence rate (per 1,000 person-years) of CV events was 62.4 in patients with a score of <15, 41.0 in those with a score between 20 and 25 and 36.7 in those with a score of >25. Multilevel analysis, adjusted for clustering and case-mix, showed that the risk to develop a new CV event was 84% higher in patients with a score of <15 (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-2.62) and 17% higher in those with a score between 15 and 25 (IRR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.93-1.49) compared with those with a score of >25. Mean quality score varied across centers from 16.5 ± 7.5 to 29.1 ± 6.3. When the score was tested as the dependent variable, it emerged that 18% of the variance in the score could be attributed to setting characteristics., Conclusions: Our study documented a close relationship between quality of diabetes care and long-term outcomes. A simple score can be used to monitor quality of care and compare the performance of different centers/physicians.