Search

Objective: Whether care group participation by general practitioners improves delivery of diabetes care is unknown. Using 'monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle target indicators as recommended by professional guidelines' as an operationalisation for quality of care, we explored whether (1) in new practices monitoring as recommended improved a year after initial care group participation (aim 1); (2) new practices and experienced practices differed regarding monitoring (aim 2)., Design: Observational, real-life cohort study., Setting: Primary care registry data from Eerstelijns Zorggroep Haaglanden (ELZHA) care group., Participants: Aim 1: From six new practices (n=538 people with diabetes) that joined care group ELZHA in January 2014, two practices (n=211 people) were excluded because of missing baseline data; four practices (n=182 people) were included. Aim 2: From all six new practices (n=538 people), 295 individuals were included. From 145 experienced practices (n=21 465 people), 13 744 individuals were included., Exposure: Care group participation includes support by staff nurses on protocolised diabetes care implementation and availability of a system providing individual monitoring information. 'Monitoring as recommended' represented minimally one annual registration of each biomedical (HbA1c, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein) and lifestyle-related target indicator (body mass index, smoking behaviour, physical exercise)., Primary Outcome Measures: Aim 1: In new practices, odds of people being monitored as recommended in 2014 were compared with baseline (2013). Aim 2: Odds of monitoring as recommended in new and experienced practices in 2014 were compared., Results: Aim 1: After 1-year care group participation, odds of being monitored as recommended increased threefold (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.84 to 4.88, p<0.001). Aim 2: Compared with new practices, no significant differences in the odds of monitoring as recommended were found in experienced practices (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.18 to 8.37, p=0.844)., Conclusions: We observed a sharp increase concerning biomedical and lifestyle monitoring as recommended after 1-year care group participation, and subsequently no significant difference between new and experienced practices-indicating that providing diabetes care within a collective approach rapidly improves registration of care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requires frequent monitoring of patients. Within a collective care group setting, doubts on the clinical effects of registration are a barrier for full adoption of T2DM registration in general practice. We explored whether full monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle-related target indicators within a care group approach is associated with lower HbA 1c levels., Design: Observational, real-life cohort study., Setting: Primary care data registry from the Hadoks (EerstelijnsZorggroepHaaglanden) care group., Exposure: The care group provides general practitioners collectively with organisational support to facilitate structured T2DM primary care. Patients are offered quarterly medical and lifestyle-related consultation., Main Outcome Measure: Full monitoring of each target indicator in patients with T2DM which includes minimally one measure of HbA 1c level, systolic blood pressure, LDL, BMI, smoking behaviour and physical exercise between January and December 2014; otherwise, patients were defined as 'incompletely monitored'. HbA 1c levels of 8137 fully monitored and 3958 incompletely monitored patients were compared, adjusted for the confounders diabetes duration, age and gender. Since recommended HbA 1c values depend on age, medication use and diabetes duration, analyses were stratified into three HbA 1c profile groups. Linear multilevel analyses enabled adjustment for general practice., Results: Compared with incompletely monitored patients, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA 1c levels (95% CI) in the first (-2.03 [-2.53 to -1.52] mmol/mol) (-0.19% [-0.23% to -0.14%]), second (-3.36 [-5.28 to -1.43] mmol/mol) (-0.31% [-0.48% to -0.13%]) and third HbA 1c profile group (-1.89 [-3.76 to -0.01] mmol/mol) (-0.17% [-0.34% to 0.00%])., Conclusions/interpretation: This study shows that in a care group setting, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA 1c levels compared with incompletely monitored patients. Since this difference might have considerable clinical impact in terms of T2DM-related risks, this might help general practices in care group settings to overcome barriers on adequate registration and thus improve structured T2DM primary care. From population health management perspective, we recommend a systematic approach to adjust the structured care protocol for incompletely monitored subgroups., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© 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.)

Purpose: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have a doubled morbidity and mortality risk compared with persons with normal glucose tolerance. Despite treatment, clinical targets for cardiovascular risk factors are not achieved. The Hoorn Diabetes Care System cohort (DCS) is a prospective cohort representing a comprehensive dataset on the natural course of T2D, with repeated clinical measures and outcomes. In this paper, we describe the design of the DCS cohort., Participants: The DCS consists of persons with T2D in primary care from the West-Friesland region of the Netherlands. Enrolment in the cohort started in 1998 and this prospective dynamic cohort currently holds 12 673 persons with T2D., Findings to Date: Clinical measures are collected annually, with a high internal validity due to the centrally organised standardised examinations. Microvascular complications are assessed by measuring kidney function, and screening feet and eyes. Information on cardiovascular disease is obtained by 1) self-report, 2) electrocardiography and 3) electronic patient records. In subgroups of the cohort, biobanking and additional measurements were performed to obtain information on, for example, lifestyle, depression and genomics. Finally, the DCS cohort is linked to national cancer and all-cause mortality registers. A selection of published findings from the DCS includes identification of subgroups with distinct development of haemoglobin A1c, blood pressure and retinopathy, and their predictors; validation of a prediction model for personalised retinopathy screening; the assessment of the role of genetics in development and treatment of T2D, providing options for personalised medicine., Future Plans: We will continue with the inclusion of persons with newly diagnosed T2D, follow-up of persons in the cohort and linkage to morbidity and mortality registries. Currently, we are involved in (inter)national projects on, among others, biomarkers and prediction models for T2D and complications and we are interested in collaborations with external researchers., Trial Registration: ISRCTN26257579., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: Our aim was to study the prevalence of self-reported hypoglycaemic sensations and its association with mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with insulin in usual care., Methods: Demographics, clinical characteristics and mortality data were obtained from 1667 patients with T2D treated with insulin in the Hoorn Diabetes Care System Cohort (DCS), a prospective cohort study using clinical care data. Self-reported hypoglycaemic sensations were defined as either mild: events not requiring help; or severe: events requiring help from others (either medical assistance or assistance of others). The association between hypoglycaemic sensations and mortality was analysed using logistic regression analysis., Results: At baseline, 981 patients (59%) reported no hypoglycaemic sensations in the past year, 612 (37%) reported only mild sensations and 74 (4%) reported severe hypoglycaemic sensations. During a median follow-up of 1.9 years, 98 patients (5.9%) died. Reporting only mild hypoglycaemic sensations was associated with a lower mortality risk (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.80), while reporting severe sensations was not significantly associated with mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.80), compared with reporting no hypoglycaemic sensations, and adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. Sensitivity analyses showed an OR of 1.38 (95% CI 0.31 to 6.11) for patients reporting severe hypoglycaemic sensations requiring medical assistance., Conclusions: Self-reported hypoglycaemic sensations are highly prevalent in our insulin-treated T2D population. Patients reporting hypoglycaemic sensations not requiring medical assistance did not have an increased risk of mortality, suggesting that these sensations are not an indicator of increased short-term mortality risk in patients with T2D., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: To evaluate whether a model that was previously developed to predict 14-day mortality for nursing home residents with dementia and lower respiratory tract infection who received antibiotics could be applied to residents who were not treated with antibiotics. Specifically, in this same data set, to update the model using recalibration methods; and subsequently examine the historical, geographical, methodological and spectrum transportability through external validation of the updated model., Design: 1 cohort study was used to develop the prediction model, and 4 cohort studies from 2 countries were used for the external validation of the model., Setting: Nursing homes in the Netherlands and the USA., Participants: 157 untreated residents were included in the development of the model; 239 untreated residents were included in the external validation cohorts., Outcome: Model performance was evaluated by assessing discrimination: area under the receiver operating characteristic curves; and calibration: Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistics and calibration graphs. Further, reclassification tables allowed for a comparison of patient classifications between models., Results: The original prediction model applied to the untreated residents, who were sicker, showed excellent discrimination but poor calibration, underestimating mortality. Adjusting the intercept improved calibration. Recalibrating the slope did not substantially improve the performance of the model. Applying the updated model to the other 4 data sets resulted in acceptable discrimination. Calibration was inadequate only in one data set that differed substantially from the other data sets in case-mix. Adjusting the intercept for this population again improved calibration., Conclusions: The discriminative performance of the model seems robust for differences between settings. To improve calibration, we recommend adjusting the intercept when applying the model in settings where different mortality rates are expected. An impact study may evaluate the usefulness of the two prediction models for treated and untreated residents and whether it supports decision-making in clinical practice., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)