Cargando…

Quality indicators in type 2 diabetes patient care: analysis per care-complexity level

BACKGROUND: This study was developed to evaluate quality indicators in type 2 diabetes patient care at the Unified Public Health System’s primary and tertiary health care centers within a local population. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of 488 patients with type 2 diabetes (148 in each pri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schneiders, Josiane, Telo, Gabriela H., Bottino, Leonardo Grabinski, Pasinato, Bruna, Neyeloff, Jeruza Lavanholi, Schaan, Beatriz D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6498653/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31073334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13098-019-0428-8
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: This study was developed to evaluate quality indicators in type 2 diabetes patient care at the Unified Public Health System’s primary and tertiary health care centers within a local population. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of 488 patients with type 2 diabetes (148 in each primary health care unit, ESF and UBS, and 192 at the tertiary health care unit) with a 1-year follow-up to evaluate the following care quality indicators: nephropathy, neuropathy and retinopathy tests, yearly lipid profile and nutritional assessments, and an inquiry about tobacco use. The presence of > 50% of the quality of care assessment measures was considered acceptable. Indicators were also evaluated in relation to patients without proper diabetes control (HbA1c > 8.5%). RESULTS: In the results, a high percentage of patients were excluded specifically for not presenting the two HbA1c tests within a year (n = 208, 58.1% at ESF; n = 225, 58.4% at UBS; and n = 39, 16.9% at the tertiary health care unit). From the included patients, only 7 (4.7%) at ESF, 7 (4.7%) at UBS, and 52 (27.0%) at the tertiary health care unit showed > 50% of the quality criteria covered. When only patients without proper diabetes control were evaluated, none of them at any of the health care units showed all the quality criteria covered. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a low percentage of care assessment measures at each evaluated health care unit, pointing out the need to improve the protocols and care lines of diabetic patients.