Diabetes care may be improved with Steno Quality Assurance Tool—A self-assessment tool in diabetes management
Section snippets
Background
Diabetes is a worldwide, fast rising epidemic where quality of treatment is far from acceptable: A recent study across four continents easily recruited more than 66,000 people with diabetes in poor metabolic control with an average HbA1c of 9.5% (80 mmol/mol) [1]. Steno-2, UKPDS and other studies have provided evidence, that intervention against risk factors reduces micro- and macro-vascular complications [2], [3]. Guidelines are almost universally available and offer assistance for the
Selection of indicators
A selected list of indicators was reviewed by 30 Indian key opinion leaders in diabetology. Seven of these formed an advisory Board for the development of the SQAT software.
The following process and outcome indicators were selected: BMI, glycaemic control HbA1c, fasting or postprandial blood glucose, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, urine albumin excretion measured, whether albuminuria was present, date of last foot and eye examination, and date of last lipid measurement. Type of
Statistics
Mean changes has been calculated for each process indicator per clinic in period 1 and period 2, and compared by means of Wilcoxon test (paired), whereas means per clinic for continuous measures, outcome indicators, in period 1 and period 2 have been compared by Paired Student T test, as has achievement of outcome goals glycaemic control: HbA1c ≤ 7% (53 mmol/mol) or FBG ≤ 6.5 mmol/l (117 mg/dl) or PPG ≤ 10 mmol/l (180 mg/dl), blood pressure ≤ 130/80 mmHg
A significance level of 5% was used.
Results
Twenty-three clinics completed the first data entry period, and nineteen completed the second data entry period. Only data from the 19 clinics entering data from both periods are presented. The clinics entered data for 4487 patients for period one and 4440 patients for period two. Mean number (range) entered per clinic in the two periods were 470 (167–1031) patients. Mean age (range) across clinics was 54.2 years (53.9–54.4). The gender distribution was 44.2% women and 55.8% men. Mean diabetes
Discussion
This study demonstrates that self-assessment of clinical quality in diabetes care using a bottom-up approach by means of a simple computer based software enables smaller and medium-sized Indian diabetes clinics to improve selected diabetes process and outcome indicators. It supports our hypothesis that a structured approach to diabetes treatment and the possibility to analyze own data will contribute to the overall improvement of clinical care.
The data entered in the first entry period
Conclusion
Diabetes care can be improved by applying SQAT as a QA self-surveillance software program that documents the changes in process and outcome indicators.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interests.
References (25)
- et al.
An observational non-interventional study of people with diabetes beginning or changed to insulin analogue therapy in non-Western countries: The A1chieve Study
Diabetes Res Clin Pract
(2011) - et al.
Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies on the management of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Lancet
(2012) - et al.
An audit of standards of care at a Sri Lankan diabetic clinic
Diabetes Res Clin Pract
(2007) - et al.
Effects of multifactorial intervention on mortality in type diabetes
NEJM
(2008) - et al.
UKPDS Study Group: intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33)
Lancet
(1998) - Diabetes Care 2012;35(January) (Suppl. 1) p....
- NICE guidelines. 2012,...
Global guidelines for type 2 diabetes
Diabetes Res Clin Pract
(2014)- et al.
Clinical care and delivery quality of diabetes care in the UK: comparison of published quality-of-care reports with results of the quality and outcomes framework for diabetes
Diabetics Med.
(2007) - Ducht Institute for healthcare improvement,...
Cited by (0)
- 1
See Appendix A for SQUAT Study Group.