评估医生对糖尿病管理指南的依从性。

Keng Boon Harold Tan
{"title":"评估医生对糖尿病管理指南的依从性。","authors":"Keng Boon Harold Tan","doi":"10.1108/09526860610661482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In 2002 the Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) audited doctors' compliance with diabetes clinical practice guidelines in public healthcare institutions and attempted to postulate factors that influenced the degree of conformity. This study aims to address this issue.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>A retrospective cross-sectional chart review of diabetes patient records sampled from hospital specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) and polyclinics was performed. Childhood, gestational and secondary diabetes cases were excluded. The nine audit parameters used were process measures concerning the assessment of HbA1c, weight, blood pressure, urinary protein, serum creatinine, serum lipids, electrocardiography, retina and feet. Age-standardised prevalence rate ratios of parameter adherence were calculated. Of the SOC cases, 89 per cent were analysed. Of the polyclinic cases, 94 per cent were analysed.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Adherence to ECG and foot assessment parameters was poor among SOC cases, while poor adherence to weight and foot assessment parameters was seen in the polyclinics. There was poorer adherence to blood pressure and ECG parameters in the SOCs, but better adherence was seen for weight assessment. Among the SOC cases, Cluster A fared better than Cluster B in ECG monitoring. In the polyclinics, better adherence was seen in Cluster A for urinary protein, serum creatinine, lipids, ECG, retinal and foot assessment parameters.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>Based on pre-existing information on local diabetes care, certain system, physician, patient and guideline factors are postulated to explain clinical practice guideline non-compliance among doctors.</p>","PeriodicalId":80009,"journal":{"name":"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services","volume":"19 2-3","pages":"267-86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/09526860610661482","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing doctors' compliance with guidelines on diabetes management.\",\"authors\":\"Keng Boon Harold Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/09526860610661482\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In 2002 the Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) audited doctors' compliance with diabetes clinical practice guidelines in public healthcare institutions and attempted to postulate factors that influenced the degree of conformity. This study aims to address this issue.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>A retrospective cross-sectional chart review of diabetes patient records sampled from hospital specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) and polyclinics was performed. Childhood, gestational and secondary diabetes cases were excluded. The nine audit parameters used were process measures concerning the assessment of HbA1c, weight, blood pressure, urinary protein, serum creatinine, serum lipids, electrocardiography, retina and feet. Age-standardised prevalence rate ratios of parameter adherence were calculated. Of the SOC cases, 89 per cent were analysed. Of the polyclinic cases, 94 per cent were analysed.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Adherence to ECG and foot assessment parameters was poor among SOC cases, while poor adherence to weight and foot assessment parameters was seen in the polyclinics. There was poorer adherence to blood pressure and ECG parameters in the SOCs, but better adherence was seen for weight assessment. Among the SOC cases, Cluster A fared better than Cluster B in ECG monitoring. In the polyclinics, better adherence was seen in Cluster A for urinary protein, serum creatinine, lipids, ECG, retinal and foot assessment parameters.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>Based on pre-existing information on local diabetes care, certain system, physician, patient and guideline factors are postulated to explain clinical practice guideline non-compliance among doctors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services\",\"volume\":\"19 2-3\",\"pages\":\"267-86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/09526860610661482\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/09526860610661482\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/09526860610661482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的:2002年,新加坡卫生部(MOH)审核了公共医疗机构医生对糖尿病临床实践指南的遵守情况,并试图推测影响遵守程度的因素。本研究旨在解决这一问题。设计/方法/方法:对医院专科门诊(soc)和综合诊所抽样的糖尿病患者记录进行回顾性横断面分析。排除儿童期、妊娠期和继发性糖尿病病例。使用的9个审计参数是过程测量,涉及评估HbA1c、体重、血压、尿蛋白、血清肌酐、血脂、心电图、视网膜和脚。计算参数依从性的年龄标准化患病率比率。在SOC病例中,分析了89%。在综合诊所的病例中,分析了94%。结果:SOC患者对心电图和足部评估参数的依从性较差,而综合诊所患者对体重和足部评估参数的依从性较差。soc患者对血压和心电图参数的依从性较差,但对体重评估的依从性较好。在SOC病例中,A组心电图监测优于B组。在综合诊所中,A组在尿蛋白、血清肌酐、血脂、心电图、视网膜和足部评估参数方面的依从性较好。原创性/价值:基于当地糖尿病护理的已有信息,假设某些系统、医生、患者和指南因素可以解释医生不遵守临床实践指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing doctors' compliance with guidelines on diabetes management.

Purpose: In 2002 the Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) audited doctors' compliance with diabetes clinical practice guidelines in public healthcare institutions and attempted to postulate factors that influenced the degree of conformity. This study aims to address this issue.

Design/methodology/approach: A retrospective cross-sectional chart review of diabetes patient records sampled from hospital specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) and polyclinics was performed. Childhood, gestational and secondary diabetes cases were excluded. The nine audit parameters used were process measures concerning the assessment of HbA1c, weight, blood pressure, urinary protein, serum creatinine, serum lipids, electrocardiography, retina and feet. Age-standardised prevalence rate ratios of parameter adherence were calculated. Of the SOC cases, 89 per cent were analysed. Of the polyclinic cases, 94 per cent were analysed.

Findings: Adherence to ECG and foot assessment parameters was poor among SOC cases, while poor adherence to weight and foot assessment parameters was seen in the polyclinics. There was poorer adherence to blood pressure and ECG parameters in the SOCs, but better adherence was seen for weight assessment. Among the SOC cases, Cluster A fared better than Cluster B in ECG monitoring. In the polyclinics, better adherence was seen in Cluster A for urinary protein, serum creatinine, lipids, ECG, retinal and foot assessment parameters.

Originality/value: Based on pre-existing information on local diabetes care, certain system, physician, patient and guideline factors are postulated to explain clinical practice guideline non-compliance among doctors.

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信