Dataset Information

Team-Based Care to Improve Diabetes Management: A Community Guide Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT:Team-based care has been increasingly used to deliver care for patients with chronic conditions, but its effectiveness for managing diabetes has not been systematically assessed. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:RCTs were identified from two sources: a high-quality, broader review comparing 11 quality improvement strategies for diabetes management (database inception to July 2010), and an updated search using the same search strategy (July 2010-October 2015). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Thirty-five studies were included in the current review; a majority focused on patients with Type 2 diabetes. Teams included patients, their primary care providers, and one or two additional healthcare professionals (most often nurses or pharmacists). Random effect meta-analysis showed that, compared with controls, team-based care was associated with greater reductions in blood glucose levels (-0.5% in HbA1c, 95% CI= -0.7, -0.3) and greater improvements in blood pressure and lipid levels. Interventions also increased the proportion of patients who reached target blood glucose, blood pressure, and lipid levels, based on American Diabetes Association guidelines available at the time. Data analysis was completed in 2016. CONCLUSIONS:For patients with Type 2 diabetes, team-based care improves blood glucose, blood pressure, and lipid levels.

SUBMITTER: Levengood TW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7373227 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Team-Based Care to Improve Diabetes Management: A Community Guide Meta-analysis.

Levengood Timothy W TW Peng Yinan Y Xiong Ka Zang KZ Song Ziwei Z Elder Randy R Ali Mohammed K MK Chin Marshall H MH Allweiss Pamela P Hunter Christine M CM Becenti Alberta A

American journal of preventive medicine 20190701 1

<h4>Context</h4>Team-based care has been increasingly used to deliver care for patients with chronic conditions, but its effectiveness for managing diabetes has not been systematically assessed.<h4>Evidence acquisition</h4>RCTs were identified from two sources: a high-quality, broader review comparing 11 quality improvement strategies for diabetes management (database inception to July 2010), and an updated search using the same search strategy (July 2010-October 2015).<h4>Evidence synthesis</h4 ...[more]

PMID: 31227069

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of disease-management programs for improving glycemic control in adults with diabetes mellitus and to study which components of programs are associated with their effectiveness.MethodsWe searched several databases for studies published up to December 2009. We included randomized controlled trials involving adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes that evaluated the effect of disease-management programs on glycated hemoglobin (hemoglobin A₁(C)) concentrations. We performed a meta-regression analysis to determine the effective components of the programs.ResultsWe included 41 randomized controlled trials in our review. Across these trials, disease-management programs resulted in a significant reduction in hemoglobin A₁(C) levels (pooled standardized mean difference between intervention and control groups -0.38 [95% confidence interval -0.47 to -0.29], which corresponds to an absolute mean difference of 0.51%). The finding was robust in the sensitivity analyses based on quality assessment. Programs in which the disease manager was able to start or modify treatment with or without prior approval from the primary care physician resulted in a greater improvement in hemoglobin A₁(C) levels (standardized mean difference -0.60 v. -0.28 in trials with no approval to do so; p < 0.001). Programs with a moderate or high frequency of contact reported a significant reduction in hemoglobin A₁(C) levels compared with usual care; nevertheless, only programs with a high frequency of contact led to a significantly greater reduction compared with low-frequency contact programs (standardized mean difference -0.56 v. -0.30, p = 0.03).InterpretationDisease-management programs had a clinically moderate but significant impact on hemoglobin A₁(C) levels among adults with diabetes. Effective components of programs were a high frequency of patient contact and the ability for disease managers to adjust treatment with or without prior physician approval.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with mental illness are frequently treated in primary care, where Primary Care Providers (PCPs) report feeling ill-equipped to manage their care. Team-based models of care improve outcomes for patients with mental illness, but multiple barriers limit adoption. Barriers include practical issues and psychosocial factors associated with the reorganization of care. Practice facilitation can improve implementation, but does not directly address the psychosocial factors or gaps in PCP skills in managing mental illness. To address these gaps, we developed Relational Team Development (RELATED). METHODS:RELATED is an implementation strategy combining practice facilitation and psychology clinical supervision methodologies to improve implementation of team-based care. It includes PCP-level clinical coaching and a team-level practice change activity. We performed a preliminary assessment of RELATED with a convergent parallel mixed method study in 2 primary care clinics in an urban Federally Qualified Health Center in Southwest, USA, 2017-2018. Study participants included PCPs, clinic staff, and patient representatives. Clinic staff and patients were recruited for the practice change activity only. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility was assessed as ease of recruitment and implementation. Acceptability was measured in surveys of PCPs and staff and focus groups. We conducted semi-structured focus groups with 3 participant groups in each clinic: PCPs; staff and patients; and leadership. Secondary outcomes were change in pre- post- intervention PCP self-efficacy in mental illness management and team-based care. We conducted qualitative observations to better understand clinic climate. RESULTS:We recruited 18 PCPs, 17 staff members, and 3 patient representatives. We ended recruitment early due to over recruitment. Both clinics developed and implemented practice change activities. The mean acceptability score was 3.7 (SD=0.3) on a 4-point Likert scale. PCPs had a statistically significant increase in their mental illness management self-efficacy [change = 0.9, p-value= <.01]. Focus group comments were largely positive, with PCPs requesting additional coaching. CONCLUSIONS:RELATED was feasible and highly acceptable. It led to positive changes in PCP self-efficacy in Mental Illness Management. If confirmed as an effective implementation strategy, RELATED has the potential to significantly impact implementation of evidence-based interventions for patients with mental illness in primary care.

Project description:Background: Treatment of diabetes requires a strict treatment scheme which demands patient self-management. Pharmacists are in a good position to provide self-management support. This review examines whether pharmacist-led interventions to support self-management in diabetes patients improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. An extended literature search was conducted with the keywords "pharmacist," "diabetes," and "self-management" using the electronic databases Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from the beginning of the database through September 2017. In addition reference lists of systematic reviews and included studies were searched. Eligibility criteria included; self-management intervention tested with an RCT, performed in an ambulatory care setting, led by a pharmacist and reporting at least one clinical- or patient-reported outcome. Primary outcomes were HbA1c (-as this is a clinical parameter for long-term diabetes follow-up), self-management and components of intervention. Secondary outcomes were blood glucose, blood pressure, BMI, lipids, adherence to medication, quality of life, and diabetes knowledge. For the meta-analysis HbA1c values were pooled with a random-effects model in Revman 5.3. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: Twenty-four studies representing 3,610 patients were included. Pharmacist-led self-management interventions included education on diabetes complications, medication, lifestyle, and teaching of self-management skills. Some studies focused on patient needs through a tailored intervention. No key components for a successful self-management intervention could be identified. Pharmacist-led self-management interventions improve HbA1c levels with a mean of 0.71% (CI -0.91, -0.51; overall effect P < 0.0001) and had a positive effect on blood pressure (SBP -5.20 mm Hg [-7.58; -2.92], DBP -3.51 mmHg [-6.00; -1.01]), BMI (-0.49 kg/m2 [-0.79; -0.19]), lipids (total cholesterol -0.19 mmol/l [-0.33; -0.05], LDL-C mmol/l -0.16 [-0.26; -0.06], HDL-C 0.32 mmol/l [0.02; 0.61]), self-management skill development, and adherence to medication. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led self-management interventions significantly improve HbA1c values in diabetes patients. These results underline the added value of pharmacists in patient-related care. Pharmacists should offer self-management support to diabetes patients in order to improve diabetes outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundAs treatments for cancer have improved, more people are surviving cancer. However, compared to people without a history of cancer, cancer survivors are more likely to die of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Increased risk for CVD-related mortality among cancer survivors is partially due to lack of medication adherence and problems that exist in care coordination between cancer specialists, primary care physicians, and cardiologists.Methods/designThe Onco-primary care networking to support TEAM-based care (ONE TEAM) study is an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial with clustering at the primary care clinic level. ONE TEAM compares the provision of the iGuide intervention to patients and primary care providers versus an education-only control. For phase 1, at the patient level, the intervention includes video vignettes and a live webinar; provider-level interventions include electronic health records-based communication and case-based webinars. Participants will be enrolled from across North Carolina one of their first visits with a cancer specialist (e.g., surgeon, radiation or medical oncologist). We use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design. Outcomes (measured at the patient level) will include Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures of management of three CVD comorbidities using laboratory testing (glycated hemoglobin [A1c], lipid profile) and blood pressure measurements; (2) medication adherence assessed pharmacy refill data using Proportion of Days Covered (PDC); and (3) patient-provider communication (Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care, PCC-Ca-36). Primary care clinics in the intervention arm will be considered non-responders if 90% or more of their participating patients do not meet the modified HEDIS quality metrics at the 6-month measurement, assessed once the first enrollee from each practice reaches the 12-month mark. Non-responders will be re-randomized to either continue to receive the iGuide 1 intervention, or to receive the iGuide 2 intervention, which includes tailored videos for participants and specialist consults with primary care providers.DiscussionAs the population of cancer survivors grows, ONE TEAM will contribute to closing the CVD outcomes gap among cancer survivors by optimizing and integrating cancer care and primary care teams. ONE TEAM is designed so that it will be possible for others to emulate and implement at scale.Trial registrationThis study (NCT04258813) was registered in clinicaltrals.gov on February 6, 2020.

Dataset Information

Team-Based Care to Improve Diabetes Management: A Community Guide Meta-analysis.

Publications

Team-Based Care to Improve Diabetes Management: A Community Guide Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets