基于心血管风险评估,优化初级保健中 2 型糖尿病患者的就诊频率:目标试验模拟研究。

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Wanchun Xu, Yuan Wang, Peter Tanuseputro, Cindy Lo Kuen Lam, Eric Yuk Fai Wan
{"title":"基于心血管风险评估,优化初级保健中 2 型糖尿病患者的就诊频率:目标试验模拟研究。","authors":"Wanchun Xu, Yuan Wang, Peter Tanuseputro, Cindy Lo Kuen Lam, Eric Yuk Fai Wan","doi":"10.1111/dom.15899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate whether the physician-encounter interval for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months among those with a calculated 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score of less than 20% without compromising their long-term outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using territory-wide public electronic medical records in Hong Kong, we emulated a target trial to compare the effectiveness of the physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 versus 2-3 months for T2D patients without prior CVDs and with a predicted risk for CVDs of less than 20% (i.e. those patients not in the high-risk category). Propensity score matching was used to emulate the randomization of participants at baseline, where 42 154 matched individuals were included for analysis. The marginal structural model was applied to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for CVD incidence and all-cause mortality, the incidence rate ratio of secondary and tertiary care utilization, as well as the between-group differences in HbA1c, blood pressure and cholesterol levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During a follow-up period of up to 12 (average: 5.1) years, there was no significantly increased risk of CVD in patients with physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 months compared with those patients with physician-encounter intervals of 2-3 months (HR [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 1.01 [0.90, 1.14]; standardized 10-year risk difference [95% CI]: -0.1% [-0.7%, 0.6%]), nor for all-cause mortality (HR: 1.00 [0.84, 1.20]; standardized 10-year risk difference: -0.1% [-0.5%, 0.3%]). Additionally, there was no observable difference in the utilization of secondary and tertiary care or key clinical parameters between these two follow-up frequencies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For T2D patients with a calculated 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%, the interval of regular physician encounters can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months without compromising patients' long-term outcomes and saving substantial service resources in primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":158,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimizing physician-encounter frequency for type 2 diabetes patients in primary care based on cardiovascular risk assessment: A target trial emulation study.\",\"authors\":\"Wanchun Xu, Yuan Wang, Peter Tanuseputro, Cindy Lo Kuen Lam, Eric Yuk Fai Wan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dom.15899\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate whether the physician-encounter interval for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months among those with a calculated 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score of less than 20% without compromising their long-term outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using territory-wide public electronic medical records in Hong Kong, we emulated a target trial to compare the effectiveness of the physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 versus 2-3 months for T2D patients without prior CVDs and with a predicted risk for CVDs of less than 20% (i.e. those patients not in the high-risk category). Propensity score matching was used to emulate the randomization of participants at baseline, where 42 154 matched individuals were included for analysis. The marginal structural model was applied to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for CVD incidence and all-cause mortality, the incidence rate ratio of secondary and tertiary care utilization, as well as the between-group differences in HbA1c, blood pressure and cholesterol levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During a follow-up period of up to 12 (average: 5.1) years, there was no significantly increased risk of CVD in patients with physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 months compared with those patients with physician-encounter intervals of 2-3 months (HR [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 1.01 [0.90, 1.14]; standardized 10-year risk difference [95% CI]: -0.1% [-0.7%, 0.6%]), nor for all-cause mortality (HR: 1.00 [0.84, 1.20]; standardized 10-year risk difference: -0.1% [-0.5%, 0.3%]). Additionally, there was no observable difference in the utilization of secondary and tertiary care or key clinical parameters between these two follow-up frequencies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For T2D patients with a calculated 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%, the interval of regular physician encounters can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months without compromising patients' long-term outcomes and saving substantial service resources in primary care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.15899\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.15899","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究在不影响长期治疗效果的前提下,能否将计算出的10年心血管疾病(CVD)风险分数低于20%的2型糖尿病(T2D)患者的医生诊治间隔时间从2-3个月优化为4-6个月:利用全港公共电子病历,我们模拟了一项目标试验,比较了对于既往未患心血管疾病且心血管疾病预测风险低于20%的T2D患者(即非高危类别患者),医生与患者之间的就诊间隔为4-6个月与2-3个月的有效性。采用倾向得分匹配法来模拟基线随机化参与者,分析中纳入了 42 154 名匹配个体。边际结构模型用于估算心血管疾病发病率和全因死亡率的危险比(HR)、二级和三级医疗机构使用率的发病率比,以及 HbA1c、血压和胆固醇水平的组间差异:在长达 12 年(平均 5.1 年)的随访期间,与就诊间隔为 2-3 个月的患者相比,就诊间隔为 4-6 个月的患者患心血管疾病的风险没有明显增加(HR [95% 置信区间 {CI}:1.01[0.90,1.14];标准化 10 年风险差异[95% CI]:-0.1% [-0.7%,0.6%]),全因死亡率也是(HR:1.00 [0.84,1.20];标准化 10 年风险差异:-0.1% [-0.7%,0.6%]):-0.1% [-0.5%, 0.3%]).此外,在这两种随访频率之间,二级和三级医疗机构的利用率或主要临床参数没有明显差异:结论:对于计算得出的 10 年心血管疾病风险低于 20% 的 T2D 患者,定期看医生的间隔时间可以从 2-3 个月优化为 4-6 个月,而不会影响患者的长期预后,同时还能节省大量的初级保健服务资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimizing physician-encounter frequency for type 2 diabetes patients in primary care based on cardiovascular risk assessment: A target trial emulation study.

Aim: To investigate whether the physician-encounter interval for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months among those with a calculated 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score of less than 20% without compromising their long-term outcomes.

Materials and methods: Using territory-wide public electronic medical records in Hong Kong, we emulated a target trial to compare the effectiveness of the physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 versus 2-3 months for T2D patients without prior CVDs and with a predicted risk for CVDs of less than 20% (i.e. those patients not in the high-risk category). Propensity score matching was used to emulate the randomization of participants at baseline, where 42 154 matched individuals were included for analysis. The marginal structural model was applied to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for CVD incidence and all-cause mortality, the incidence rate ratio of secondary and tertiary care utilization, as well as the between-group differences in HbA1c, blood pressure and cholesterol levels.

Results: During a follow-up period of up to 12 (average: 5.1) years, there was no significantly increased risk of CVD in patients with physician-encounter intervals of 4-6 months compared with those patients with physician-encounter intervals of 2-3 months (HR [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 1.01 [0.90, 1.14]; standardized 10-year risk difference [95% CI]: -0.1% [-0.7%, 0.6%]), nor for all-cause mortality (HR: 1.00 [0.84, 1.20]; standardized 10-year risk difference: -0.1% [-0.5%, 0.3%]). Additionally, there was no observable difference in the utilization of secondary and tertiary care or key clinical parameters between these two follow-up frequencies.

Conclusions: For T2D patients with a calculated 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%, the interval of regular physician encounters can be optimized from 2-3 to 4-6 months without compromising patients' long-term outcomes and saving substantial service resources in primary care.

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
Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism
Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
319
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism is primarily a journal of clinical and experimental pharmacology and therapeutics covering the interrelated areas of diabetes, obesity and metabolism. The journal prioritises high-quality original research that reports on the effects of new or existing therapies, including dietary, exercise and lifestyle (non-pharmacological) interventions, in any aspect of metabolic and endocrine disease, either in humans or animal and cellular systems. ‘Metabolism’ may relate to lipids, bone and drug metabolism, or broader aspects of endocrine dysfunction. Preclinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetic studies, meta-analyses and those addressing drug safety and tolerability are also highly suitable for publication in this journal. Original research may be published as a main paper or as a research letter.
×
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