Dataset Information

Can a chronic care model collaborative reduce heart disease risk in patients with diabetes?

ABSTRACT: There is a need to identify effective practical interventions to decrease cardiovascular disease risk in patients with diabetes.We examine the impact of participation in a collaborative implementing the chronic care model (CCM) on the reduction of cardiovascular disease risk in patients with diabetes.Controlled pre- and postintervention study.Persons with diabetes receiving care at 13 health care organizations exposed to the CCM collaborative and controls receiving care in nonexposed sites.Ten-year risk of cardiovascular disease; determined using a modified United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study risk engine score. A total number of 613 patients from CCM intervention sites and 557 patients from usual care control sites met the inclusion criteria. The baseline mean 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease was 31% for both the intervention group and the control group. Participants in both groups had improved blood pressure, lipid levels, and HbA1c levels during the observation period. Random intercept hierarchical regression models showed that the intervention group had a 2.1% (95% CI -3.7%, -0.5%) greater reduction in predicted risk for future cardiovascular events when compared to the control group. This would result in a reduced risk of one cardiovascular disease event for every 48 patients exposed to the intervention.Over a 1-year interval, this collaborative intervention using the CCM lowered the cardiovascular disease risk factors of patients with diabetes who were cared for in the participating organization's settings. Further work could enhance the impact of this promising multifactorial intervention on cardiovascular disease risk reduction.

SUBMITTER: Vargas RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1824758 | biostudies-other | 2007 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To determine the effectiveness of collaborative care in reducing depression in primary care patients with diabetes or heart disease using practice nurses as case managers. A two-arm open randomised cluster trial with wait-list control for 6 months. The intervention was followed over 12 months. Eleven Australian general practices, five randomly allocated to the intervention and six to the control. 400 primary care patients (206 intervention, 194 control) with depression and type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease or both. The practice nurse acted as a case manager identifying depression, reviewing pathology results, lifestyle risk factors and patient goals and priorities. Usual care continued in the controls. A five-point reduction in depression scores for patients with moderate-to-severe depression. Secondary outcome was improvements in physiological measures. Mean depression scores after 6 months of intervention for patients with moderate-to-severe depression decreased by 5.7±1.3 compared with 4.3±1.2 in control, a significant (p=0.012) difference. (The plus-minus is the 95% confidence range.) Intervention practices demonstrated adherence to treatment guidelines and intensification of treatment for depression, where exercise increased by 19%, referrals to exercise programmes by 16%, referrals to mental health workers (MHWs) by 7% and visits to MHWs by 17%. Control-practice exercise did not change, whereas referrals to exercise programmes dropped by 5% and visits to MHWs by 3%. Only referrals to MHW increased by 12%. Intervention improvements were sustained over 12 months, with a significant (p=0.015) decrease in 10-year cardiovascular disease risk from 27.4±3.4% to 24.8±3.8%. A review of patients indicated that the study's safety protocols were followed. TrueBlue participants showed significantly improved depression and treatment intensification, sustained over 12 months of intervention and reduced 10-year cardiovascular disease risk. Collaborative care using practice nurses appears to be an effective primary care intervention. ACTRN12609000333213 (Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry).

Project description:BackgroundPatients with depression and poorly controlled diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both have an increased risk of adverse outcomes and high health care costs. We conducted a study to determine whether coordinated care management of multiple conditions improves disease control in these patients.MethodsWe conducted a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial in 14 primary care clinics in an integrated health care system in Washington State, involving 214 participants with poorly controlled diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both and coexisting depression. Patients were randomly assigned to the usual-care group or to the intervention group, in which a medically supervised nurse, working with each patient's primary care physician, provided guideline-based, collaborative care management, with the goal of controlling risk factors associated with multiple diseases. The primary outcome was based on simultaneous modeling of glycated hemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and systolic blood-pressure levels and Symptom Checklist-20 (SCL-20) depression outcomes at 12 months; this modeling allowed estimation of a single overall treatment effect.ResultsAs compared with controls, patients in the intervention group had greater overall 12-month improvement across glycated hemoglobin levels (difference, 0.58%), LDL cholesterol levels (difference, 6.9 mg per deciliter [0.2 mmol per liter]), systolic blood pressure (difference, 5.1 mm Hg), and SCL-20 depression scores (difference, 0.40 points) (P<0.001). Patients in the intervention group also were more likely to have one or more adjustments of insulin (P=0.006), antihypertensive medications (P<0.001), and antidepressant medications (P<0.001), and they had better quality of life (P<0.001) and greater satisfaction with care for diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both (P<0.001) and with care for depression (P<0.001).ConclusionsAs compared with usual care, an intervention involving nurses who provided guideline-based, patient-centered management of depression and chronic disease significantly improved control of medical disease and depression. (Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468676.).

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the process of case finding for depression in people with diabetes and coronary heart disease within the context of a pay-for-performance scheme.DesignEthnographic study drawing on observations of practice routines and consultations, debriefing interviews with staff and patients and review of patient records.SettingGeneral practices in Leeds, UK.Participants12 purposively sampled practices with a total of 119 staff; 63 consultation observations and 57 patient interviews.Main outcome measureAudio recorded consultations and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals along with observation field notes were thematically analysed. We assessed outcomes of case finding from patient records.ResultsCase finding exacerbated the discordance between patient and professional agendas, the latter already dominated by the tightly structured and time-limited nature of chronic illness reviews. Professional beliefs and abilities affected how case finding was undertaken; there was uncertainty about how to ask the questions, particularly among nursing staff. Professionals were often wary of opening an emotional 'can of worms'. Subsequently, patient responses potentially suggesting emotional problems could be prematurely shut down by professionals. Patients did not understand why they were asked questions about depression. This sometimes led to defensive or even defiant answers to case finding. Follow-up of patients highlighted inconsistent systems and lines of communication for dealing with positive results on case finding.ConclusionsCase finding does not fit naturally within consultations; both professional and patient reactions somewhat subverted the process recommended by national guidance. Quality improvement strategies will need to take account of our results in two ways. First, despite their apparent simplicity, the case finding questions are not consultation-friendly and acceptable alternative ways to raise the issue of depression need to be supported. Second, case finding needs to operate within structured pathways which can be accommodated within available systems and resources.

Dataset Information

Can a chronic care model collaborative reduce heart disease risk in patients with diabetes?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets