Cargando…

Provider beliefs about diabetes treatment have little impact on glycemic control of their patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To improve the health of people with diabetes, it is essential to identify why patients experience extended periods of poor glycemic control before therapeutic intensification. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed 252 primary care providers at Kaiser Permanente Northwest to determine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: LeBlanc, Erin S, Rosales, A Gabriela, Kachroo, Sumesh, Mukherjee, Jayanti, Funk, Kristine L, Schneider, Jennifer L, Nichols, Gregory A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4342519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25741443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2014-000062
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To improve the health of people with diabetes, it is essential to identify why patients experience extended periods of poor glycemic control before therapeutic intensification. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed 252 primary care providers at Kaiser Permanente Northwest to determine their beliefs about the glycemic goals of their patients, treatment intensification behavior, and barriers to achieving optimal glycemic control. We linked the responses of 149 providers to the health records of their 18 346 patients with diabetes. RESULTS: Patient glycemic levels were not related to either individualized glycemic goals or provider intensification behavior. Providers’ beliefs about diabetic treatment and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) goals were poorly associated with patient HbA1c levels. Providers identified patients’ resistance to lifestyle behaviors and taking insulin, lack of medication adherence, and psychosocial issues as the main barriers to optimal glycemic control. Lack of time to care for complex patients was also a barrier. Providers who agreed that “current research did not support A1C levels <7%” were less likely to have patients with HbA1c levels <7% (OR=0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97) and patients of providers who disagreed that “some patients will have an A1C >9% no matter what I do” were 16% more likely to have patients with HbA1c <7% (1.16, 1.03 to 1.30) compared with providers who were neutral about those statements. CONCLUSIONS: Given the consistency of HbA1c levels across providers despite differences in beliefs and intensification behaviors, these barriers may be best addressed by instituting changes at the system level (ie, instituting institutional glycemic targets or outreach for dysglycemia) rather than targeting practice patterns of individual providers.