Monitoring Prediabetes Screening in Two Primary Care Offices in Rural Appalachia: A Quality Improvement Process.

IF 0.2 Q4 NURSING
Rebecca T Clark, Christine M Mullins, Jean C Hemphill
{"title":"Monitoring Prediabetes Screening in Two Primary Care Offices in Rural Appalachia: A Quality Improvement Process.","authors":"Rebecca T Clark, Christine M Mullins, Jean C Hemphill","doi":"10.1891/JDNP-D-20-00027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>One-third of the U.S. population has prediabetes, but 90% remain undiagnosed because healthcare providers are not screening for this condition.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this quality improvement project was to monitor prediabetes screening and identification, and implement evidence-based recommendations including registered dietician referral.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This project involved using an evidence-based screening tool to measure individual risk of prediabetes. Aggregate data was collected to evaluate screening implementation, evidence-based recommendations offered by providers, and assess patient risk factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The percentage of patients at risk for prediabetes was 41.3% (<i>n</i> = 111). The most frequent risks were identified as overweight, history of hypertension, family history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and older age. Providers offered education on weight loss 68.5% (<i>n</i> = 76) and exercise 76.6% (<i>n</i> = 85) but referred 33.3% (<i>n</i> = 37) patients for nutrition education. The screening rates were 52.3% (<i>n</i> = 176) and 72.5% (<i>n</i> = 244) in clinics A and B respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A gap remains in using evidence-based recommendations to decrease risk of prediabetes. Prediabetes screening identified a greater percentage of persons in this population.</p><p><strong>Implications for nursing: </strong>There is a need for consistent practice of evidence-based recommendations. This project set the benchmark for future efforts to educate, encourage, and measure providers successes.</p>","PeriodicalId":40310,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Doctoral Nursing Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Doctoral Nursing Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1891/JDNP-D-20-00027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: One-third of the U.S. population has prediabetes, but 90% remain undiagnosed because healthcare providers are not screening for this condition.

Objective: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to monitor prediabetes screening and identification, and implement evidence-based recommendations including registered dietician referral.

Methods: This project involved using an evidence-based screening tool to measure individual risk of prediabetes. Aggregate data was collected to evaluate screening implementation, evidence-based recommendations offered by providers, and assess patient risk factors.

Results: The percentage of patients at risk for prediabetes was 41.3% (n = 111). The most frequent risks were identified as overweight, history of hypertension, family history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and older age. Providers offered education on weight loss 68.5% (n = 76) and exercise 76.6% (n = 85) but referred 33.3% (n = 37) patients for nutrition education. The screening rates were 52.3% (n = 176) and 72.5% (n = 244) in clinics A and B respectively.

Conclusions: A gap remains in using evidence-based recommendations to decrease risk of prediabetes. Prediabetes screening identified a greater percentage of persons in this population.

Implications for nursing: There is a need for consistent practice of evidence-based recommendations. This project set the benchmark for future efforts to educate, encourage, and measure providers successes.

监测阿巴拉契亚农村地区两家初级保健诊所的糖尿病筛查:质量改进过程。
背景:三分之一的美国人患有糖尿病前期,但由于医疗服务提供者没有进行筛查,90%的人仍未得到诊断:本质量改进项目旨在监测糖尿病前期筛查和识别,并实施循证建议,包括注册营养师转诊:方法:该项目采用循证筛查工具来衡量个人罹患糖尿病前期的风险。收集汇总数据,以评估筛查实施情况、医疗服务提供者提供的循证建议以及评估患者的风险因素:有糖尿病前期风险的患者比例为 41.3%(n = 111)。最常见的风险因素包括超重、高血压病史、2 型糖尿病(T2DM)家族史和年龄偏大。医疗服务提供者为 68.5%(76 人)的患者提供了减肥教育,为 76.6%(85 人)的患者提供了运动教育,但为 33.3%(37 人)的患者转介了营养教育。A诊所和B诊所的筛查率分别为52.3%(n = 176)和72.5%(n = 244):结论:在利用循证建议降低糖尿病前期风险方面仍存在差距。糖尿病前期筛查在这一人群中发现的比例更高:对护理工作的启示:有必要持续实践循证建议。该项目为今后教育、鼓励和衡量提供者的成功树立了标杆。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信