Cargando…

Clinical Variation in the Treatment Practices for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross‐Sectional Patient Simulation Study Among Primary Care Physicians and Cardiologists

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease risk stratification is necessary and critically important in patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite its known benefits to guide treatment and prevention, we hypothesized that providers do not routinely incorporate this into their diagnostic and treatment decisions....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Belen, Enrico, Ganesan, Divya, Paculdo, David, Gill, Rosalynn, Peabody, John W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10356086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37382120
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028634
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease risk stratification is necessary and critically important in patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite its known benefits to guide treatment and prevention, we hypothesized that providers do not routinely incorporate this into their diagnostic and treatment decisions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The QuiCER DM (QURE CVD Evaluation of Risk in Diabetes Mellitus) study enrolled 161 primary care physicians and 80 cardiologists. Between March 2022 and June 2022, we measured the care variation in risk determination among these providers caring for simulated patients with type 2 diabetes. We found a wide variation in the overall assessment of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. Participants performed half of the necessary care items with quality‐of‐care scores, ranging between 13% and 84%, averaging 49.4±12.6%. Participants did not assess cardiovascular risk in 18.3% of cases and incorrectly stratified risk in 42.8% of cases. Only 38.9% of participants arrived at the correct cardiovascular risk stratification. Those who correctly identified a cardiovascular risk score were significantly more likely to order nonpharmacologic treatments, advising on their patients' nutrition (38.8% versus 29.9%, P=0.013) and the correct glycated hemoglobin target (37.7% versus 15.6%, P<0.001). Pharmacologic treatments, however, did not vary between those who correctly specified risk and those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Physician participants struggled to determine the correct cardiovascular disease risk and specify the appropriate pharmacologic interventions in simulated patients with type 2 diabetes. Additionally, there was a wide variation in the quality of care regardless of risk level, indicating opportunities to improve risk stratification.