Compare diabetes care patterns by primary care accessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IF 3.4
Wei-Chen Lee, Laura R Porterfield, Elizabeth M Vaughan, Mukaila Raji
{"title":"Compare diabetes care patterns by primary care accessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Wei-Chen Lee, Laura R Porterfield, Elizabeth M Vaughan, Mukaila Raji","doi":"10.1111/dme.70442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted primary care delivery and may have exacerbated disparities in chronic disease management, particularly for diabetes mellitus. This study sought to investigate how living in areas with low access to primary care providers (PCP) affected the delivery of diabetes care during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective longitudinal study using the Panel 24 of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data merged with the 2019 County Health Rankings data to classify areas by PCP availability (low vs. high). Dependent variables included measures of care processes (e.g., number of HbA1c tests), quality (e.g., diet modification) and outcomes (e.g., eye complications). Multivariable models were adjusted for demographics, insurance status and COVID-19 diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>HbA1c testing, foot examinations and retinal examinations decreased during the pandemic for both groups, with much more pronounced declines in low PCP density areas. The largest change occurred in the frequency of attending group classes, dropping nearly 80% in low PCP areas. Individuals in low PCP areas were more likely to initiate oral diabetes medications (as opposed to insulin) compared with those in high PCP areas (0.84% vs. 0.28%, p = 0.015). Older age was associated with new diabetes (HR = 1.05) and new kidney disease (HR = 1.04), but less likely to start diet modification (HR = 0.99). Being female (HR = 0.69) and non-Hispanic whites (HR = 0.60) were associated with a lower likelihood of diabetes incidents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings highlight the importance of preparing public health responses for future events that limit access to routine care, particularly for individuals with or at risk of diabetes. Strengthening both in-person and virtual primary care services is critical to reducing gaps in chronic disease management and to supporting ongoing PCP follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":520603,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","volume":" ","pages":"e70442"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70442","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted primary care delivery and may have exacerbated disparities in chronic disease management, particularly for diabetes mellitus. This study sought to investigate how living in areas with low access to primary care providers (PCP) affected the delivery of diabetes care during the pandemic.

Methods: This is a retrospective longitudinal study using the Panel 24 of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data merged with the 2019 County Health Rankings data to classify areas by PCP availability (low vs. high). Dependent variables included measures of care processes (e.g., number of HbA1c tests), quality (e.g., diet modification) and outcomes (e.g., eye complications). Multivariable models were adjusted for demographics, insurance status and COVID-19 diagnosis.

Findings: HbA1c testing, foot examinations and retinal examinations decreased during the pandemic for both groups, with much more pronounced declines in low PCP density areas. The largest change occurred in the frequency of attending group classes, dropping nearly 80% in low PCP areas. Individuals in low PCP areas were more likely to initiate oral diabetes medications (as opposed to insulin) compared with those in high PCP areas (0.84% vs. 0.28%, p = 0.015). Older age was associated with new diabetes (HR = 1.05) and new kidney disease (HR = 1.04), but less likely to start diet modification (HR = 0.99). Being female (HR = 0.69) and non-Hispanic whites (HR = 0.60) were associated with a lower likelihood of diabetes incidents.

Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of preparing public health responses for future events that limit access to routine care, particularly for individuals with or at risk of diabetes. Strengthening both in-person and virtual primary care services is critical to reducing gaps in chronic disease management and to supporting ongoing PCP follow-up.

按COVID-19大流行期间初级保健可及性比较糖尿病护理模式。
目的:2019冠状病毒病大流行扰乱了初级保健服务,并可能加剧了慢性病管理方面的差异,特别是糖尿病管理方面的差异。本研究旨在调查在大流行期间,生活在获得初级保健提供者(PCP)机会较少的地区如何影响糖尿病护理的提供。方法:这是一项回顾性纵向研究,使用医疗支出小组调查第24小组的数据与2019年县健康排名数据合并,按PCP可用性(低与高)对地区进行分类。因变量包括护理过程(如糖化血红蛋白检测次数)、质量(如饮食改变)和结果(如眼部并发症)。对多变量模型进行人口统计学、保险状况和COVID-19诊断调整。研究结果:在大流行期间,两组的HbA1c检测、足部检查和视网膜检查都有所下降,在低PCP密度地区下降更为明显。最大的变化发生在参加小组课程的频率上,在低PCP地区下降了近80%。与高PCP地区的个体相比,低PCP地区的个体更有可能开始口服糖尿病药物(而不是胰岛素)(0.84%比0.28%,p = 0.015)。年龄越大与新发糖尿病(HR = 1.05)和新发肾脏疾病(HR = 1.04)相关,但开始饮食改变的可能性越小(HR = 0.99)。女性(HR = 0.69)和非西班牙裔白人(HR = 0.60)患糖尿病的可能性较低。结论:这些发现强调了为限制获得常规护理的未来事件准备公共卫生应对措施的重要性,特别是对于糖尿病患者或有糖尿病风险的个体。加强面对面和虚拟初级保健服务对于缩小慢性病管理方面的差距和支持正在进行的PCP随访至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书