Use of automated reminder letters to improve diabetes management in primary care: outcomes of a quality improvement initiative.

Quality in primary care Pub Date : 2013-01-01
Sally H Berryman, Brian T Sick, Qi Wang, Paul J Swan, Anne Marie Weber-Main
{"title":"Use of automated reminder letters to improve diabetes management in primary care: outcomes of a quality improvement initiative.","authors":"Sally H Berryman,&nbsp;Brian T Sick,&nbsp;Qi Wang,&nbsp;Paul J Swan,&nbsp;Anne Marie Weber-Main","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Effective management of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) can be time-consuming and costly. One patient-centred quality improvement strategy is to generate reminder letters to prompt patient action(s), but this strategy's effect on DM outcomes is uncertain.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine whether using the electronic medical record to automatically generate reminder letters for patients not meeting recommended DM targets is associated with improvement in practice level quality metrics for DM management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over 15 months, letters were sent monthly to all patients with DM in a large, urban, primary care teaching practice whose records for haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or blood pressure (BP) indicated non-compliance with recommended levels and testing intervals. Logistic regression was used to analyse cross-sectional, practice-level differences in the proportion of patients meeting DM quality metrics (HbA1c < 7%, LDL < 100 mg/dl and BP < 130/80 mmHg; rates of checking each value within the last 12 months; and a composite of these five measures) across four time points: six months before the intervention, start of the intervention, end of the 15-month intervention period and six months after the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of letters sent per month ranged from 284 to 392, representing 28-38% of all patients with DM. At the end of the intervention, patients' odds of being at goal were higher than before the intervention began for LDL < 100 mg/dl, and for HbA1c and LDL tested once within the last 12 months (or 1.24, P = 0.005; or 1.35, P = 0.03; or 1.48, P < 0.001, respectively). Post intervention, declines were seen in LDL checked within the last 12 months (or 0.76, P = 0.003) and in the composite endpoint (or 0.78, P = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The automated patient-reminder letter intervention was associated with modest improvements in several, but not all DM measures. This approach may be an effective tool for improving quality of care for patients with DM.</p>","PeriodicalId":88096,"journal":{"name":"Quality in primary care","volume":"21 6","pages":"359-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Background: Effective management of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) can be time-consuming and costly. One patient-centred quality improvement strategy is to generate reminder letters to prompt patient action(s), but this strategy's effect on DM outcomes is uncertain.

Aim: To determine whether using the electronic medical record to automatically generate reminder letters for patients not meeting recommended DM targets is associated with improvement in practice level quality metrics for DM management.

Methods: Over 15 months, letters were sent monthly to all patients with DM in a large, urban, primary care teaching practice whose records for haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or blood pressure (BP) indicated non-compliance with recommended levels and testing intervals. Logistic regression was used to analyse cross-sectional, practice-level differences in the proportion of patients meeting DM quality metrics (HbA1c < 7%, LDL < 100 mg/dl and BP < 130/80 mmHg; rates of checking each value within the last 12 months; and a composite of these five measures) across four time points: six months before the intervention, start of the intervention, end of the 15-month intervention period and six months after the intervention.

Results: The number of letters sent per month ranged from 284 to 392, representing 28-38% of all patients with DM. At the end of the intervention, patients' odds of being at goal were higher than before the intervention began for LDL < 100 mg/dl, and for HbA1c and LDL tested once within the last 12 months (or 1.24, P = 0.005; or 1.35, P = 0.03; or 1.48, P < 0.001, respectively). Post intervention, declines were seen in LDL checked within the last 12 months (or 0.76, P = 0.003) and in the composite endpoint (or 0.78, P = 0.005).

Conclusions: The automated patient-reminder letter intervention was associated with modest improvements in several, but not all DM measures. This approach may be an effective tool for improving quality of care for patients with DM.

使用自动提醒信改善初级保健中的糖尿病管理:质量改进倡议的结果。
背景:糖尿病(DM)患者的有效管理既耗时又昂贵。一种以患者为中心的质量改进策略是生成提醒信,以促使患者采取行动,但该策略对糖尿病结局的影响尚不确定。目的:确定使用电子病历对未达到推荐糖尿病目标的患者自动生成提醒信是否与糖尿病管理实践水平质量指标的改善有关。方法:在15个月的时间里,每个月向大型城市初级保健教学实践中的所有糖尿病患者发送信件,这些患者的血红蛋白A1c (HbA1c)、低密度脂蛋白(LDL)或血压(BP)记录显示不符合推荐水平和检测间隔。采用Logistic回归分析满足糖尿病质量指标(HbA1c < 7%, LDL < 100 mg/dl, BP < 130/80 mmHg)的患者比例的横断面、实践水平差异;最近12个月内每项价值的核对率;这是四个时间点的五项测量的综合:干预前六个月,干预开始,15个月干预期结束,干预后六个月。结果:每月发送的信件数量从284到392不等,占所有DM患者的28-38%。在干预结束时,LDL < 100 mg/dl的患者达到目标的几率高于干预开始前,在过去12个月内检测一次HbA1c和LDL的患者(或1.24,P = 0.005;或1.35,P = 0.03;或1.48,P < 0.001)。干预后,在过去12个月内检查的LDL(或0.76,P = 0.003)和复合终点(或0.78,P = 0.005)均有所下降。结论:自动患者提醒信干预与几种(但不是全部)糖尿病测量的适度改善有关。这种方法可能是提高糖尿病患者护理质量的有效工具。
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