Patient Adherence to Hemoglobin A1c Testing Recommendations in Telemedicine and In-Office Cohorts During COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Baughman D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8485170 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionPoor glycemic control is a serious challenge in successful diabetes management. Given the low adherence and compliance with HbA1c testing frequency and the corresponding delay in the appropriate medication adjustment, point-of-care testing (POCT) for HbA1c provides an opportunity for better control of diabetes and higher patient satisfaction. The data with this regard are limited in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to assess the level of patient satisfaction associated with the POCT service implementation for HbA1c and evaluate the differences between the number of requested and conducted HbA1c tests before and after POCT implementation and its effect on glycemic control in Saudi clinical practice.MethodsWe conducted a single-center ambispective descriptive cohort study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This study had two phases: the retrospective phase (January 2017 to December 2017) and the prospective phase (January 2018 to December 2018). Patient satisfaction was assessed using the patient satisfaction questionnaire short form (PSQ-18) and on-site HbA1c point-of-care testing (HbA1c-POCT) satisfaction questionnaire.ResultsThis study included 75 patients with diabetes (37% type 1, 63% type 2) with a mean age of 44.35 (± 17.97) years. The adherence to physician recommendations for HbA1c testing frequency increased from 24% to 85% (before and after POCT implementation, respectively). High levels of satisfaction across seven dimensions of PSQ-18 (77-88%) were reported towards the provided healthcare service after POCT implementation. Furthermore, a high level of agreement on the statements of the on-site HbA1c-POCT satisfaction questionnaire was also observed. Finally, the mean HbA1c level has significantly improved after POCT implementation compared to the traditional HbA1c laboratory testing before POCT implementation [8.34 ± 0.67 and 8.06 ± 0.62, respectively, p < 0.001).ConclusionHbA1c testing at POCT improved adherence to recommendations for HbA1c testing frequency for better glycemic control and higher patient satisfaction. POCT reduces turnaround time, improves glycemic control, and facilitates the decision-making process. HbA1c measurement with POC devices is recommended to be implemented in diabetes treatment centers. All of the described benefits of POCT come together to make HbA1c testing the most common procedure for diabetes management at the point of care.
| S-EPMC8384983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) can be used to assess type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk. We asked whether HbA1c was associated with T2D risk in four scenarios of clinical information availability: 1) HbA1c alone, 2) fasting laboratory tests, 3) clinic data, and 4) fasting laboratory tests and clinic data. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:We studied a prospective cohort of white (N = 11,244) and black (N = 2,294) middle-aged participants without diabetes in the Framingham Heart Study and Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study. Association of HbA1c with incident T2D (defined by medication use or fasting glucose [FG] ?126 mg/dL) was evaluated in regression models adjusted for 1) age and sex (demographics); 2) demographics, FG, HDL, and triglycerides; 3) demographics, BMI, blood pressure, and T2D family history; or 4) all preceding covariates. We combined results from cohort and race analyses by random-effects meta-analyses. Subsidiary analyses tested the association of HbA1c with developing T2D within 8 years or only after 8 years. RESULTS:Over 20 years, 3,315 individuals developed T2D. With adjustment for demographics, the odds of T2D increased fourfold for each percentage-unit increase in HbA1c. The odds ratio (OR) was 4.00 (95% CI 3.14, 5.10) for blacks and 4.73 (3.10, 7.21) for whites, resulting in a combined OR of 4.50 (3.35, 6.03). After adjustment for fasting laboratory tests and clinic data, the combined OR was 2.68 (2.15, 3.34) over 20 years, 5.79 (2.51, 13.36) within 8 years, and 2.23 (1.94, 2.57) after 8 years. CONCLUSIONS:HbA1c predicts T2D in different common scenarios and is useful for identifying individuals with elevated T2D risk in both the short- and long-term.
| S-EPMC5741154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Proposed payment reforms in the US healthcare system would hold providers accountable for the care delivered to an assigned patient population. Annual hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) tests are recommended for all diabetics, but some patient populations may face barriers to high quality healthcare that are beyond providers' control. The magnitude of fine-grained variations in care for diabetic Medicare beneficiaries, and their associations with local population characteristics, are unknown.HbA1c tests were recorded for 480,745 diabetic Medicare beneficiaries. Spatial analysis was used to create ZIP code-level estimated testing rates. Associations of testing rates with local population characteristics that are outside the control of providers--population density, the percent African American, with less than a high school education, or living in poverty--were assessed.In 2009, 83.3% of diabetic Medicare beneficiaries received HbA1c tests. Estimated ZIP code-level rates ranged from 71.0% in the lowest decile to 93.1% in the highest. With each 10% increase in the percent of the population that was African American, associated HbA1c testing rates were 0.24% lower (95% CI -0.32--0.17); for identical increases in the percent with less than a high school education or the percent living in poverty, testing rates were 0.70% lower (-0.95--0.46) and 1.6% lower (-1.8--1.4), respectively. Testing rates were lowest in the least and most densely populated ZIP codes. Population characteristics explained 5% of testing rate variations.HbA1c testing rates are associated with population characteristics, but these characteristics fail to explain the vast majority of variations. Consequently, even complete risk-adjustment may have little impact on some process of care quality measures; much of the ZIP code-related variations in testing rates likely result from provider-based differences and idiosyncratic local factors not related to poverty, education, or race.
| S-EPMC4215926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Major (above-knee or below-knee) amputation is a complication of diabetes and is seen more common among black and Hispanic patients. While amputation rates have declined for patients with diabetes in the last decade, it remains unknown if these improvements have equitably extended across racial groups and if measures of diabetic care, such as hemoglobin A1c testing, are associated with these improvements. We set out to characterize secular changes in amputation rates among black, Hispanic, and white patients, and to determine associations between hemoglobin A1c testing and amputation risk.We identified 11,942,840 Medicare patients (55% female) with diabetes over the age of 65 years between 2002 and 2012 and followed them for a mean of 6.6 years. Of these, 86% were white, 11.5% were black, and 2.5% were Hispanic. We recorded the occurrence of major amputation and hemoglobin A1c testing during this time period and studied secular changes in amputation rate by race (black, Hispanic, and white). Finally, we examined associations between amputation risk and hemoglobin A1c testing. We measured both the presence of any testing and testing consistency using 3 categories: poor consistency (hemoglobin A1c testing in 0-50% of years), medium consistency (testing in 50-90% of years), and high consistency (testing in >90% of the years in the cohort).Between 2002 and 2012, the average major lower-extremity amputation rate in diabetic Medicare patients was 1.78 per 1,000 per year for black patients, 1.15 per 1,000 per year for Hispanic patients, and 0.56 per 1,000 per year for white patients (P < 0.001). Over the study period, the incidence of major amputation in Medicare patients with diabetes declined by 54%, from 1.15 per 1,000 in 2002 to 0.53 per 1,000 in 2012 (rate ratio = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.54). The reduction in amputation rate was similar across racial groups: 52% for black patients, 61% for Hispanic patients, and 55% for white patients. In multivariable analysis adjusting for patient characteristics, including race, any use of hemoglobin A1c testing was associated with a 15% decline in amputation risk (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87; P < 0.001). High consistency hemoglobin A1c testing was associated with a 39% decline in amputation (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.62; P < 0.0001).Although more frequent among racial minorities, major lower-extremity amputation rates have declined similarly across black, Hispanic, and white patients over the last decade. Hemoglobin A1c testing, particularly the consistency of testing over time, may be an effective component metric of longitudinal quality measures toward limiting amputation in all races.
| S-EPMC5064433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnnual hemoglobin A1c testing is recommended for patients with diabetes mellitus. However, it is unknown how consistently patients with diabetes mellitus receive hemoglobin A1c testing over time, or whether testing consistency is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes.Methods and resultsWe identified 1 574 415 Medicare patients (2002-2012) with diabetes mellitus over the age of 65. We followed each patient for a minimum of 3 years to determine their consistency in hemoglobin A1C testing, using 3 categories: low (testing in 0 or 1 of 3 years), medium (testing in 2 of 3 years), and high (testing in all 3 years). In unweighted and inverse propensity-weighted cohorts, we examined associations between testing consistency and major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, amputation, or the need for leg revascularization. Overall, 70.2% of patients received high-consistency testing, 17.6% of patients received medium-consistency testing, and 12.2% of patients received low-consistency testing. When compared to high-consistency testing, low-consistency testing was associated with a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events or death in unweighted analyses (hazard ratio [HR]=1.21; 95% CI, 1.20-1.23; P<0.001), inverse propensity-weighted analyses (HR=1.16; 95% CI, 1.15-1.17; P<0.001), and weighted analyses limited to patients who had at least 4 physician visits annually (HR=1.15; 95% CI, 1.15-1.16; P<0.001). Less-consistent testing was associated with worse results for each cardiovascular outcome and in analyses using all years as the exposure.ConclusionsConsistent annual hemoglobin A1c testing is associated with fewer adverse cardiovascular outcomes in this observational cohort of Medicare patients of diabetes mellitus.
| S-EPMC5015285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients' understanding of the hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has been linked to better diabetes care outcomes (glycemic control, self-care). This is concerning given low documented rates of HbA1c understanding. In this non-blinded, randomized trial, we compared two formats for communicating the HbA1c, selected based on input from people with diabetes, to standard presentation to assess their impact on participants' glycemic control and diabetes-related perceptions. METHODS:To design the tested formats, we interviewed 25 patients with diabetes and reviewed a range of possible formats, including color-based scales and graphs. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and subjected to thematic analysis. Synthesizing interviewees' feedback, we selected two formats, one using a combination of words and colors (Words) and one using a color-coded graph (Graph), for further evaluation. We then randomized adults with poorly controlled diabetes to receive mailed information on their current diabetes control in one of three ways: 1) standard lab report (control), 2) Words format, or 3) Graph format. The primary outcome was HbA1c change at 6 months. Also examined were changes in participants' diabetes-related perceptions and choice of participation incentive. RESULTS:Of the 234 enrolled participants, 76.9% were Black, and their median baseline HbA1c was 9.1% (interquartile range 8.4-10.4). There were no between-arm differences in HbA1c change (-?1.04% [SD 2.2] Control vs. -0.59% [SD 2.0] Words vs. -0.54% [SD 2.1] Graph, p >?0.05 for all comparisons). Participants in the Words arm had an increase in the accuracy of their perceptions of diabetes seriousness (p =?0.04) and in the number of participants reporting a diabetes management goal (p =?0.01). CONCLUSIONS:The two patient-informed communication formats did not differentially impact glycemic control among adults with inadequately controlled diabetes. However, a significant proportion of participants in the Words arm had an increase in the accuracy of their perception of diabetes seriousness, a potential mediating factor in positive diabetes-related behavioral changes. With increasing use of patient-facing online portals, thoughtfully designed approaches for visually communicating essential, but poorly understood, information like the HbA1c to patients have the potential to facilitate interpretation and support self-management. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:Prospectively registered as NCT01886170.
| S-EPMC7059706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective The risk of leg amputation among patients with diabetes has declined over the past decade, while use of preventative measures-such as hemoglobin A1c monitoring-has increased. However, the relationship between hemoglobin A1c testing and amputation risk remains unclear. Methods We examined annual rates of hemoglobin A1c testing and major leg amputation among Medicare patients with diabetes from 2003 to 2012 across 306 hospital referral regions. We created linear regression models to study associations between hemoglobin A1c testing and lower extremity amputation. Results From 2003 to 2012, the proportion of patients who received hemoglobin A1c testing increased 10% (74% to 84%), while their rate of lower extremity amputation decreased 50% (430 to 232/100,000 beneficiaries). Regional hemoglobin A1c testing weakly correlated with crude amputation rate in both years (2003 R?=?-0.20, 2012 R?=?-0.21), and further weakened with adjustment for age, sex, and disability status (2003 R?=?-0.11, 2012 R?=?-0.17). In a multivariable model of 2012 amputation rates, hemoglobin A1c testing was not a significant predictor. Conclusion Lower extremity amputation among patients with diabetes nearly halved over the past decade but only weakly correlated with hemoglobin A1c testing throughout the study period. Better metrics are needed to understand the relationship between preventative care and amputation.
| S-EPMC5457810 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDiabetes is a known risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted this study to determine if there is a correlation between hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) level and poor outcomes in hospitalized patients with diabetes and COVID-19.MethodsThis is a retrospective, single-center, observational study of patients with diabetes (defined by an HbA1C level of ≥6.5% or known medical history of diabetes) who had a confirmed case of COVID-19 and required hospitalization. All patients were admitted to our institution between March 3, 2020, and May 5, 2020. HbA1C results for each patient were divided into quartiles: 5.1% to 6.7% (32-50 mmol/mol), 6.8% to 7.5% (51-58 mmol/mol), 7.6% to 8.9% (60-74 mmol/mol), and >9% (>75 mmol/mol). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included admission to an intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, acute thrombosis, and length of hospital stay.ResultsA total of 506 patients were included. The number of deaths within quartiles 1 through 4 were 30 (25%), 37 (27%), 34 (27%), and 24 (19%), respectively. There was no statistical difference in the primary or secondary outcomes among the quartiles, except that acute kidney injury was less frequent in quartile 4.ConclusionThere was no significant association between HbA1C level and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes who are hospitalized with COVID-19. HbA1C levels should not be used for risk stratification in these patients.
| S-EPMC8286241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Screening involves the presumptive identification of asymptomatic individuals at increased risk for unrecognized disease. We examined changes in screening practices for prediabetes and diabetes since January 2010, when HbA1c was first recommended as an option for screening and diagnosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:We studied members without diabetes of an HMO ?45 years of age continuously enrolled for ?3 years and assigned to primary care clinicians affiliated with a large academic health system. We defined screening as the first oral glucose tolerance test, HbA1c, or glucose test performed between 2010 and 2014. RESULTS:Of 12,772 eligible patients, 9,941 (78%) were screened at least once over 3 years. HbA1c was the initial screening test 14% of the time and glucose 86% of the time. Of those screened with HbA1c, 63% had abnormal results defined as HbA1c ?5.7% (?39 mmol/mol). Of those tested with glucose, 30% had abnormal results defined as glucose ?100 mg/dL, and 5% had abnormal results defined as glucose ?126 mg/dL. Patients with abnormal HbA1c levels and those with glucose levels ?126 mg/dL were equally likely to be scheduled for follow-up appointments (41% vs. 39%), but those with abnormal HbA1c levels were more likely to be diagnosed with prediabetes or diabetes (36% vs. 26%). CONCLUSIONS:As we observed in 2004, rates of screening are high. HbA1c is still used less frequently than glucose for screening but is more likely to result in a clinical diagnosis. Evidence to support guidelines to define the role of random glucose screening, including definition of appropriate cut points and follow-up, is needed.
| S-EPMC7373494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patient adherence to treatment recommendations is an important issue for healthcare providers, in a multitude of specialties, and is critical when assessing the efficacy and effectiveness of a particular treatment approach. Patients who have swallowing impairment often require complex and specific interventions requiring altered daily patterns of behavior. Patients with dysphagia who do not follow recommendations or prescribed exercises may not receive maximum benefit of an intervention. Poor adherence also makes it more difficult to evaluate efficacy of a treatment both clinically and in experimental settings. Further, swallow safety can be compromised if certain recommendations are not followed. Our purpose was to systematically review the literature to understand what is known about adherence within the field of dysphagia treatment. We systematically identified 12 studies that tracked and reported patient-specific adherence. In this review, we found that the average adherence rate from these studies ranges between 21.9 and 51.9%. Adherence to prophylactic treatment recommendations for patients with head and neck cancer was the focus in 9/12 studies. The findings of this review identify a large gap in knowledge regarding adherence to dysphagia treatment. Few studies account for adherence within their study designs. When planning dysphagia treatment studies, it is imperative that investigators include information regarding patient adherence to accurately interpret findings. Given the variable adherence rates found in this review, factors influencing patient adherence with dysphagia treatments should be identified to increase adherence in future trials.
| S-EPMC5866734 | biostudies-literature