Multilevel Variation in Diabetes Screening Within an Integrated Health System

Author:

Obinwa Udoka1,Pérez Adriana1,Lingvay Ildiko23ORCID,Meneghini Luigi24ORCID,Halm Ethan A.23,Bowen Michael E.23ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX

2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

3. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

4. Parkland Health & Hospital System, Dallas, TX

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Variation in diabetes screening in clinical practice is poorly described. We examined the interplay of patient, provider, and clinic factors explaining variation in diabetes screening within an integrated health care system in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of primary care patients aged 18–64 years with two or more outpatient visits between 2010 and 2015 and no diagnosis of diabetes according to electronic health record (EHR) data. Hierarchical three-level models were used to evaluate multilevel variation in screening at the patient, provider, and clinic levels across 12 clinics. Diabetes screening was defined by a resulted gold standard screening test. RESULTS Of 56,818 patients, 70% completed diabetes screening with a nearly twofold variation across clinics (51–92%; P < 0.001). Of those meeting American Diabetes Association (ADA) (69%) and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) (36%) screening criteria, three-quarters were screened with a nearly twofold variation across clinics (ADA 53–92%; USPSTF 49–93%). The yield of ADA and USPSTF screening was similar for diabetes (11% vs. 9%) and prediabetes (38% vs. 36%). Nearly 70% of patients not eligible for guideline-based screening were also tested. The USPSTF guideline missed more cases of diabetes (6% vs. 3%) and prediabetes (26% vs. 19%) than the ADA guideline. After adjustment for patient, provider, and clinic factors and accounting for clustering, twofold variation in screening by provider and clinic remained (median odds ratio 1.97; intraclass correlation 0.13). CONCLUSIONS Screening practices vary widely and are only partially explained by patient, provider, and clinic factors available in the EHR. Clinical decision support and system-level interventions are needed to optimize screening practices.

Funder

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases

Publisher

American Diabetes Association

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine

Reference29 articles.

1. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019;American Diabetes Association;Diabetes Care,2019

2. Screening for abnormal blood glucose and type 2 diabetes mellitus: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement;Siu;Ann Intern Med,2015

3. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Diabetes Translation. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017. Estimates of Diabetes and Its Burden in the United States [Internet], 2017. Available from https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2019

4. Receipt of glucose testing and performance of two US diabetes screening guidelines, 2007–2012;Bullard;PLoS One,2015

5. National patterns in diabetes screening: data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2012;Kiefer;J Gen Intern Med,2015

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3