COVID-19 期间澳大利亚全科 2 型糖尿病高危患者的血糖监测和控制。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Kirrilee Jane Barlow, Paul P Fahey, Evan Atlantis
{"title":"COVID-19 期间澳大利亚全科 2 型糖尿病高危患者的血糖监测和控制。","authors":"Kirrilee Jane Barlow, Paul P Fahey, Evan Atlantis","doi":"10.1136/fmch-2023-002271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted general practice worldwide, primarily due to public health measures that restricted access to care for chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. These measures disproportionately affected higher risk groups with type 2 diabetes, such as older people and those with obesity. This study aims to identify factors that may have influenced the rates of compliance with testing guidelines and target glycaemic control in Australian general practice settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a serial cross-sectional study design of patient record data from general practices representative of the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District between 2020 and 2022. Aggregated patient records were analysed to determine percentages of subgroups with a blood glycaemic testing interval consistent with guidelines (≥1 within 15 months) and achieving target glycaemic control (by glycated haemoglobin of ≤7%). Linear regression models were used to test the association between independent and dependent variables, and to generate regression coefficients and 95% CI, corrected for time trends.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the average 14 356 patient records per month, 55% were male, 53% had a body mass index (BMI) <30 and 55% were aged 55-74 years. Compliance to testing guidelines slightly decreased (75-73%) but was positively associated with male sex (2.5%, 95% CI 1.7%, 3.4%), BMI≥30 (9.6%, 95% CI 8.8%, 10.4%) and 55-74 years (7.5%, 95% CI 6.6%, 8.5%) and 75 years and over age groups (7.1%, 95% CI 6.2%, 7.9%). Mean percentage of patient records achieving target glycaemic control slightly increased and was negatively associated with male sex (-3.7%, 95% CI -5.2%, -2.2%), but positively associated with 55-74 years (4.5%, 95% CI 3.8%, 5.1%) and 75 years and over age groups (12.2%, 95% CI 4.5%, 20.0%). Compliance to testing guidelines increased with each additional general practice per 10 000 persons (8.4%, 95% CI 4.9%, 11.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with type 2 diabetes in Australia continued to follow glycaemic testing guidelines at the same rate. In fact, there was a slight improvement in glycaemic control among all subgroups of patients, including those at higher risk. These findings are encouraging, but the longer term impact of COVID-19 on type 2 diabetes care is still unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":44590,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine and Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/51/c1/fmch-2023-002271.PMC10423797.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Glycaemic monitoring and control among high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes in Australian general practice during COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Kirrilee Jane Barlow, Paul P Fahey, Evan Atlantis\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/fmch-2023-002271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted general practice worldwide, primarily due to public health measures that restricted access to care for chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. These measures disproportionately affected higher risk groups with type 2 diabetes, such as older people and those with obesity. This study aims to identify factors that may have influenced the rates of compliance with testing guidelines and target glycaemic control in Australian general practice settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a serial cross-sectional study design of patient record data from general practices representative of the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District between 2020 and 2022. Aggregated patient records were analysed to determine percentages of subgroups with a blood glycaemic testing interval consistent with guidelines (≥1 within 15 months) and achieving target glycaemic control (by glycated haemoglobin of ≤7%). Linear regression models were used to test the association between independent and dependent variables, and to generate regression coefficients and 95% CI, corrected for time trends.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the average 14 356 patient records per month, 55% were male, 53% had a body mass index (BMI) <30 and 55% were aged 55-74 years. Compliance to testing guidelines slightly decreased (75-73%) but was positively associated with male sex (2.5%, 95% CI 1.7%, 3.4%), BMI≥30 (9.6%, 95% CI 8.8%, 10.4%) and 55-74 years (7.5%, 95% CI 6.6%, 8.5%) and 75 years and over age groups (7.1%, 95% CI 6.2%, 7.9%). Mean percentage of patient records achieving target glycaemic control slightly increased and was negatively associated with male sex (-3.7%, 95% CI -5.2%, -2.2%), but positively associated with 55-74 years (4.5%, 95% CI 3.8%, 5.1%) and 75 years and over age groups (12.2%, 95% CI 4.5%, 20.0%). Compliance to testing guidelines increased with each additional general practice per 10 000 persons (8.4%, 95% CI 4.9%, 11.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with type 2 diabetes in Australia continued to follow glycaemic testing guidelines at the same rate. In fact, there was a slight improvement in glycaemic control among all subgroups of patients, including those at higher risk. These findings are encouraging, but the longer term impact of COVID-19 on type 2 diabetes care is still unclear.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44590,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family Medicine and Community Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/51/c1/fmch-2023-002271.PMC10423797.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Family Medicine and Community Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2023-002271\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2023-002271","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:COVID-19 大流行扰乱了全球的全科诊疗,主要原因是公共卫生措施限制了慢性病(如 2 型糖尿病)的治疗。这些措施对患有 2 型糖尿病的高危人群(如老年人和肥胖症患者)的影响尤为严重。本研究旨在确定在 COVID-19 大流行期间,可能影响澳大利亚全科医生遵守检测指南和目标血糖控制率的因素:我们采用序列横断面研究设计,收集了 2020 年至 2022 年间 Nepean 蓝山地方卫生区全科医生的患者记录数据。我们对汇总的患者记录进行了分析,以确定血糖检测间隔符合指南要求(15 个月内≥1 次)并达到目标血糖控制(糖化血红蛋白≤7%)的亚群百分比。使用线性回归模型检验自变量和因变量之间的关联,并生成回归系数和 95% CI,对时间趋势进行校正:在平均每月 14 356 份患者记录中,55% 为男性,53% 有体重指数(BMI):在 COVID-19 大流行期间,澳大利亚的 2 型糖尿病患者继续以相同的比例遵守血糖检测指南。事实上,包括高危人群在内的所有亚群患者的血糖控制情况都略有改善。这些发现令人鼓舞,但 COVID-19 对 2 型糖尿病护理的长期影响尚不清楚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Glycaemic monitoring and control among high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes in Australian general practice during COVID-19.

Glycaemic monitoring and control among high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes in Australian general practice during COVID-19.

Glycaemic monitoring and control among high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes in Australian general practice during COVID-19.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted general practice worldwide, primarily due to public health measures that restricted access to care for chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. These measures disproportionately affected higher risk groups with type 2 diabetes, such as older people and those with obesity. This study aims to identify factors that may have influenced the rates of compliance with testing guidelines and target glycaemic control in Australian general practice settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We used a serial cross-sectional study design of patient record data from general practices representative of the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District between 2020 and 2022. Aggregated patient records were analysed to determine percentages of subgroups with a blood glycaemic testing interval consistent with guidelines (≥1 within 15 months) and achieving target glycaemic control (by glycated haemoglobin of ≤7%). Linear regression models were used to test the association between independent and dependent variables, and to generate regression coefficients and 95% CI, corrected for time trends.

Results: Of the average 14 356 patient records per month, 55% were male, 53% had a body mass index (BMI) <30 and 55% were aged 55-74 years. Compliance to testing guidelines slightly decreased (75-73%) but was positively associated with male sex (2.5%, 95% CI 1.7%, 3.4%), BMI≥30 (9.6%, 95% CI 8.8%, 10.4%) and 55-74 years (7.5%, 95% CI 6.6%, 8.5%) and 75 years and over age groups (7.1%, 95% CI 6.2%, 7.9%). Mean percentage of patient records achieving target glycaemic control slightly increased and was negatively associated with male sex (-3.7%, 95% CI -5.2%, -2.2%), but positively associated with 55-74 years (4.5%, 95% CI 3.8%, 5.1%) and 75 years and over age groups (12.2%, 95% CI 4.5%, 20.0%). Compliance to testing guidelines increased with each additional general practice per 10 000 persons (8.4%, 95% CI 4.9%, 11.8%).

Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with type 2 diabetes in Australia continued to follow glycaemic testing guidelines at the same rate. In fact, there was a slight improvement in glycaemic control among all subgroups of patients, including those at higher risk. These findings are encouraging, but the longer term impact of COVID-19 on type 2 diabetes care is still unclear.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Medicine and Community Health (FMCH) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the topics of family medicine, general practice and community health. FMCH strives to be a leading international journal that promotes ‘Health Care for All’ through disseminating novel knowledge and best practices in primary care, family medicine, and community health. FMCH publishes original research, review, methodology, commentary, reflection, and case-study from the lens of population health. FMCH’s Asian Focus section features reports of family medicine development in the Asia-pacific region. FMCH aims to be an exemplary forum for the timely communication of medical knowledge and skills with the goal of promoting improved health care through the practice of family and community-based medicine globally. FMCH aims to serve a diverse audience including researchers, educators, policymakers and leaders of family medicine and community health. We also aim to provide content relevant for researchers working on population health, epidemiology, public policy, disease control and management, preventative medicine and disease burden. FMCH does not impose any article processing charges (APC) or submission charges.
×
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