Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework

• Autores: Sri Ram Pentakota, Mangala Rajan, Graeme Fincke, Chin-Lin Tseng, Donald R. Miller, Cindy Christiansen, Eve A. Kerr, Leonard M. Pogach
• Localización: Diabetes care, ISSN-e 0149-5992, Vol. 35, Nº. 6, 2012, págs. 1285-1292
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • To evaluate the relationship between diabetes care and types of comorbidity, classified by the degree to which their treatment is concordant with that for diabetes. Retrospective cohort study (fiscal year [FY] 2001 to FY 2004) of 42,826 veterans with new-onset diabetes in FY 2003. Veterans were classified into five chronic comorbid illness groups (CCIGs): none, concordant only, discordant only, both concordant and discordant, and dominant. Five diabetes-related care measures were assessed in FY 2004 (guideline-consistent testing and treatment goals for HbA^sub lc^ and LDL cholesterol and diabetes-related outpatient visits). Analyses included logistic regressions adjusting for age, race, sex, marital status, priority code, and interaction between CCIGs and visit frequency. Only 20% of patients had no comorbidities. Mean number of visits per year ranged from 7.8 (no CCIG) to 17.5 (dominant CCIG). In unadjusted analyses, presence of any illness was associated with equivalent or better care. In the fully adjusted model, we found interaction between CCIG and visit frequency. When visits were < 7 per year, the odds of meeting the goal of HbA^sub lc^ <8% were similar in the concordant (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.83-1.11]) and lower in the discordant (0.90 [0.81-0.99]) groups compared with the no comorbidity group. Among patients with >24 visits per year, these odds were insignificant. Dominant CCIG was associated with substantially reduced care for glycemic control for all visit categories and for lipid management at all but the highest visit category. Our study indicates that diabetes care varies by types of comorbidity. Concordant illnesses result in similar or better care, regardless of visit frequency. Discordant illnesses are associated with diminished care: an effect that decreases as visit frequency increases.

    To evaluate the relationship between diabetes care and types of comorbidity, classified by the degree to which their treatment is concordant with that for diabetes. Retrospective cohort study (fiscal year [FY] 2001 to FY 2004) of 42,826 veterans with new-onset diabetes in FY 2003. Veterans were classified into five chronic comorbid illness groups (CCIGs): none, concordant only, discordant only, both concordant and discordant, and dominant. Five diabetes-related care measures were assessed in FY 2004 (guideline-consistent testing and treatment goals for HbA^sub lc^ and LDL cholesterol and diabetes-related outpatient visits). Analyses included logistic regressions adjusting for age, race, sex, marital status, priority code, and interaction between CCIGs and visit frequency. Only 20% of patients had no comorbidities. Mean number of visits per year ranged from 7.8 (no CCIG) to 17.5 (dominant CCIG). In unadjusted analyses, presence of any illness was associated with equivalent or better care. In the fully adjusted model, we found interaction between CCIG and visit frequency. When visits were < 7 per year, the odds of meeting the goal of HbA^sub lc^ <8% were similar in the concordant (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.83-1.11]) and lower in the discordant (0.90 [0.81-0.99]) groups compared with the no comorbidity group. Among patients with >24 visits per year, these odds were insignificant. Dominant CCIG was associated with substantially reduced care for glycemic control for all visit categories and for lipid management at all but the highest visit category. Our study indicates that diabetes care varies by types of comorbidity. Concordant illnesses result in similar or better care, regardless of visit frequency. Discordant illnesses are associated with diminished care: an effect that decreases as visit frequency increases.

    Ha solicitado la traducción automática simultánea del contenido seleccionado de nuestras bases de datos. Esta funcionalidad únicamente se ofrece para su comodidad y no intenta sustituir a la traducción por parte de un profesional. Mostrar rechazo de responsabilidad completo Ni ProQuest ni sus titulares asumen responsabilidad ni ofrecen garantía alguna con respecto a las traducciones. Las traducciones se generan automáticamente "TAL CUAL" y "SEGÚN DISPONIBILIDAD" y no permanecen en nuestros sistemas. PROQUEST Y SUS TITULARES RECHAZAN ESPECÍFICAMENTE SU RESPONSABILIDAD SOBRE CUALQUIER TIPO DE GARANTÍA EXPRESA O IMPLÍCITA, INCLUYENDO, ENTRE OTRAS, CUALQUIER GARANTÍA DE DISPONIBILIDAD, EXACTITUD, OPORTUNIDAD, TOTALIDAD, NO CUMPLIMIENTO, NO VIOLACIÓN, COMERCIABILIDAD O IDONEIDAD PARA UN PROPÓSITO PARTICULAR. El uso de las traducciones está sujeto a todas las restricciones de uso incluidas en su Acuerdo de Licencia de Productos Electrónicos. Al utilizar la funcionalidad de traducción acuerda a renunciar a cualquier tipo de reclamación contra ProQuest o sus titulares por el uso de dicha funcionalidad y cualquier escrito derivado de la misma. Ocultar rechazo de responsabilidad completo Traducciones con tecnología de LEC.

    Traducciones con tecnología de LEC.