Analysis of English general practice level data linking medication levels, service activity and demography to levels of glycaemic control being achieved in type 2 diabetes to improve clinical practice and patient outcomes.
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
/ blood
Drug Costs
Drug Monitoring
/ economics
Drug Resistance
General Practice
/ organization & administration
Glycated Hemoglobin
/ analysis
Humans
Hyperglycemia
/ prevention & control
Hypoglycemia
/ chemically induced
Hypoglycemic Agents
/ adverse effects
Medical Audit
Patient Education as Topic
/ economics
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
Quality Improvement
/ economics
Quality of Health Care
/ economics
Regression Analysis
State Medicine
/ economics
United Kingdom
hba1c outcome
prescribing
primary care
type 2 diabetes
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 09 2019
06 09 2019
Historique:
entrez:
9
9
2019
pubmed:
9
9
2019
medline:
2
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Evaluate relative clinical effectiveness of treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using a statistical model of real-world evidence within UK general practitioner practices (GPP), to quantify the opportunities for diabetes care performance improvement. From the National Diabetes Audit in 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, GPP target glycaemic control (TGC-%HbA1c ≤58 mmol/mol) and higher glycaemic risk (HGR -%HbA1c results >86 mmol/mol) outcomes were linked using multivariate linear regression to prescribing, demographics and practice service indicators. This was carried out both cross-sectionally (XS) (within year) and longitudinally (Lo) (across years) on 35 indicators. Standardised β coefficients were used to show relative level of impact of each factor. Improvement opportunity was calculated as impact on TGC & HGR numbers. Values from 6525 GPP with 2.7 million T2DM individuals were included. The cross-sectional model accounted for up to 28% TGC variance and 35% HGR variance, and the longitudinal model accounted for up to 9% TGC and 17% HGR variance. Practice service indicators including % achieving routine checks/blood pressure/cholesterol control targets were positively correlated, while demographic indicators including % younger age/social deprivation/white ethnicity were negatively correlated. The β values for selected molecules are shown as (increased TGC; decreased HGR), canagliflozin (XS 0.07;0.145/Lo 0.04;0.07), metformin (XS 0.12;0.04/Lo -;-), sitagliptin (XS 0.06;0.02/Lo 0.10;0.06), empagliflozin (XS-;0.07/Lo 0.09;0.07), dapagliflozin (XS -;0.04/Lo -;0.4), sulphonylurea (XS -0.18;-0.12/Lo-;-) and insulin (XS-0.14;0.02/ Lo-0.09;-). Moving all GPP prescribing and interventions to the equivalent of the top performing decile of GPP could result in total patients in TGC increasing from 1.90 million to 2.14 million, and total HGR falling from 191 000 to 123 000. GPP using more legacy therapies such as sulphonylurea/insulin demonstrate poorer outcomes, while those applying holistic patient management/use of newer molecules demonstrate improved glycaemic outcomes. If all GPP moved service levels/prescribing to those of the top decile, both TGC/HGR could be substantially improved.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31494602
pii: bmjopen-2018-028278
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028278
pmc: PMC6731821
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glycated Hemoglobin A
0
Hypoglycemic Agents
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e028278Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
J Palliat Med. 2009 Feb;12(2):181-7
pubmed: 19207063
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014 Feb;16(2):124-36
pubmed: 23911013
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Aug 20;159(4):262-74
pubmed: 24026259
Lipids Health Dis. 2017 Apr 13;16(1):58
pubmed: 28403877
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018 Jan;20(1):185-194
pubmed: 28730750
Diabet Med. 2018 Jan;35(1):63-71
pubmed: 29120503
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018 Jul;20(7):1659-1669
pubmed: 29516618
Int J Clin Pract. 2018 Apr;72(4):e13080
pubmed: 29537664