Clinical audit on assessment of non-glycemic parameters in diabetic patients by physicians.
Clinical audit
diabetes care
macrovascular
microvascular complications
outpatient care
Journal
Journal of family medicine and primary care
ISSN: 2249-4863
Titre abrégé: J Family Med Prim Care
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101610082
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
23
11
2020
revised:
24
12
2020
accepted:
04
01
2021
entrez:
1
7
2021
pubmed:
2
7
2021
medline:
2
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major health problem in family practice causing multiple micro and macrovascular complications; the prevention of which should be the main aim of treating physicians. Lack of proper assessment can hasten the complications and a meticulous screening system is a prerequisite in every diabetic patient's evaluation. The aim of this study was to assess the pattern of screening for non-glycemic parameters in type 2 DM patients by physicians in an outpatient setting. A cross-sectional study was conducted in a teaching hospital during December 2019. A total of 254 patients with type 2 DM without any complications were randomly selected for screening as per the criteria developed by RSSDI [Research Society for the Study of Diabetes in India]. Complete history and physical examination were done by physicians in all the participants. Measurement of blood pressure at every visit was done in about 95% of patients and 90% of them were counseled for cessation of smoking. But only about 60% or less of patients were screened for microalbuminuria, diabetic retinopathy, and peripheral neuropathy. Advice on comprehensive foot care was also not a regular practice among physicians. This clinical audit showed that 90% of the patients had undergone only 4 of the 9 RSSDI recommended screening. The other parameters had been carried out in only among 40 to 60% of the patients. Thus, primary care physicians have to emphasize on the subtle but important criteria like ophthalmic examination, peripheral neuropathy and microalbuminuria during regular outpatient visits.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major health problem in family practice causing multiple micro and macrovascular complications; the prevention of which should be the main aim of treating physicians. Lack of proper assessment can hasten the complications and a meticulous screening system is a prerequisite in every diabetic patient's evaluation.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the pattern of screening for non-glycemic parameters in type 2 DM patients by physicians in an outpatient setting.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was conducted in a teaching hospital during December 2019. A total of 254 patients with type 2 DM without any complications were randomly selected for screening as per the criteria developed by RSSDI [Research Society for the Study of Diabetes in India].
RESULTS
RESULTS
Complete history and physical examination were done by physicians in all the participants. Measurement of blood pressure at every visit was done in about 95% of patients and 90% of them were counseled for cessation of smoking. But only about 60% or less of patients were screened for microalbuminuria, diabetic retinopathy, and peripheral neuropathy. Advice on comprehensive foot care was also not a regular practice among physicians.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This clinical audit showed that 90% of the patients had undergone only 4 of the 9 RSSDI recommended screening. The other parameters had been carried out in only among 40 to 60% of the patients. Thus, primary care physicians have to emphasize on the subtle but important criteria like ophthalmic examination, peripheral neuropathy and microalbuminuria during regular outpatient visits.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34195125
doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2305_20
pii: JFMPC-10-1917
pmc: PMC8208193
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1917-1921Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Diabetes Complications. 2017 Feb;31(2):494-503
pubmed: 27866701
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 May;98(22):e15849
pubmed: 31145334
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;132:169-170
pubmed: 28962686
Int J Qual Health Care. 2012 Dec;24(6):612-8
pubmed: 23118094
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017 Jul;71(7):816-824
pubmed: 28422124
J Assoc Physicians India. 2004 Jun;52:468-74
pubmed: 15645957
East Mediterr Health J. 2008 May-Jun;14(3):636-46
pubmed: 18720628
J Indian Med Assoc. 2004 Aug;102(8):426, 428, 430 passim
pubmed: 15719805
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17;168(8):569-576
pubmed: 29507945
J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2015 Aug;6(Suppl 1):S58-62
pubmed: 26604621
J Assoc Physicians India. 2013 Jan;61(1 Suppl):12-5
pubmed: 24482981
JAMA. 2002 May 15;287(19):2570-81
pubmed: 12020339
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020 Apr;162:108086
pubmed: 32068099
Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2017 Jan 23;9:8
pubmed: 28127405
J Assoc Physicians India. 2013 Feb;61(2):102-9
pubmed: 24471248