Cargando…

Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between diabetes care and types of comorbidity, classified by the degree to which their treatment is concordant with that for diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study (fiscal year [FY] 2001 to FY 2004) of 42,826 veterans with new-onset...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pentakota, Sri Ram, Rajan, Mangala, Fincke, B. Graeme, Tseng, Chin-Lin, Miller, Donald R., Christiansen, Cindy L., Kerr, Eve A., Pogach, Leonard M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Diabetes Association 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3357228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22432109
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1569
_version_ 1782233641028419584
author Pentakota, Sri Ram
Rajan, Mangala
Fincke, B. Graeme
Tseng, Chin-Lin
Miller, Donald R.
Christiansen, Cindy L.
Kerr, Eve A.
Pogach, Leonard M.
author_facet Pentakota, Sri Ram
Rajan, Mangala
Fincke, B. Graeme
Tseng, Chin-Lin
Miller, Donald R.
Christiansen, Cindy L.
Kerr, Eve A.
Pogach, Leonard M.
author_sort Pentakota, Sri Ram
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between diabetes care and types of comorbidity, classified by the degree to which their treatment is concordant with that for diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study (fiscal year [FY] 2001 to FY 2004) of 42,826 veterans with new-onset diabetes in FY 2003. Veterans were classified into five chronic comorbid illness groups (CCIGs): none, concordant only, discordant only, both concordant and discordant, and dominant. Five diabetes-related care measures were assessed in FY 2004 (guideline-consistent testing and treatment goals for HbA(1c) and LDL cholesterol and diabetes-related outpatient visits). Analyses included logistic regressions adjusting for age, race, sex, marital status, priority code, and interaction between CCIGs and visit frequency. RESULTS: Only 20% of patients had no comorbidities. Mean number of visits per year ranged from 7.8 (no CCIG) to 17.5 (dominant CCIG). In unadjusted analyses, presence of any illness was associated with equivalent or better care. In the fully adjusted model, we found interaction between CCIG and visit frequency. When visits were <7 per year, the odds of meeting the goal of HbA(1c) <8% were similar in the concordant (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.83–1.11]) and lower in the discordant (0.90 [0.81–0.99]) groups compared with the no comorbidity group. Among patients with >24 visits per year, these odds were insignificant. Dominant CCIG was associated with substantially reduced care for glycemic control for all visit categories and for lipid management at all but the highest visit category. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that diabetes care varies by types of comorbidity. Concordant illnesses result in similar or better care, regardless of visit frequency. Discordant illnesses are associated with diminished care: an effect that decreases as visit frequency increases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3357228
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher American Diabetes Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33572282013-06-01 Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework Pentakota, Sri Ram Rajan, Mangala Fincke, B. Graeme Tseng, Chin-Lin Miller, Donald R. Christiansen, Cindy L. Kerr, Eve A. Pogach, Leonard M. Diabetes Care Original Research OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between diabetes care and types of comorbidity, classified by the degree to which their treatment is concordant with that for diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study (fiscal year [FY] 2001 to FY 2004) of 42,826 veterans with new-onset diabetes in FY 2003. Veterans were classified into five chronic comorbid illness groups (CCIGs): none, concordant only, discordant only, both concordant and discordant, and dominant. Five diabetes-related care measures were assessed in FY 2004 (guideline-consistent testing and treatment goals for HbA(1c) and LDL cholesterol and diabetes-related outpatient visits). Analyses included logistic regressions adjusting for age, race, sex, marital status, priority code, and interaction between CCIGs and visit frequency. RESULTS: Only 20% of patients had no comorbidities. Mean number of visits per year ranged from 7.8 (no CCIG) to 17.5 (dominant CCIG). In unadjusted analyses, presence of any illness was associated with equivalent or better care. In the fully adjusted model, we found interaction between CCIG and visit frequency. When visits were <7 per year, the odds of meeting the goal of HbA(1c) <8% were similar in the concordant (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.83–1.11]) and lower in the discordant (0.90 [0.81–0.99]) groups compared with the no comorbidity group. Among patients with >24 visits per year, these odds were insignificant. Dominant CCIG was associated with substantially reduced care for glycemic control for all visit categories and for lipid management at all but the highest visit category. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that diabetes care varies by types of comorbidity. Concordant illnesses result in similar or better care, regardless of visit frequency. Discordant illnesses are associated with diminished care: an effect that decreases as visit frequency increases. American Diabetes Association 2012-06 2012-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3357228/ /pubmed/22432109 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1569 Text en © 2012 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.
spellingShingle Original Research
Pentakota, Sri Ram
Rajan, Mangala
Fincke, B. Graeme
Tseng, Chin-Lin
Miller, Donald R.
Christiansen, Cindy L.
Kerr, Eve A.
Pogach, Leonard M.
Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title_full Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title_fullStr Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title_full_unstemmed Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title_short Does Diabetes Care Differ by Type of Chronic Comorbidity?: An evaluation of the Piette and Kerr framework
title_sort does diabetes care differ by type of chronic comorbidity?: an evaluation of the piette and kerr framework
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3357228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22432109
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1569
work_keys_str_mv AT pentakotasriram doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT rajanmangala doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT finckebgraeme doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT tsengchinlin doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT millerdonaldr doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT christiansencindyl doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT kerrevea doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework
AT pogachleonardm doesdiabetescaredifferbytypeofchroniccomorbidityanevaluationofthepietteandkerrframework