Cargando…

Chasms in Achievement of Recommended Diabetes Care among Geographic Regions in Korea

BACKGROUND: Although effective care for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is well known, considerable inadequate care has been still existed. Variations in achievement of the recommended quality indicators inT2DM care among small areas are not well known in Korea. This study examined the quality of care T2DM c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cho, Sanghyun, Shin, Ji-Yeon, Kim, Hyun Joo, Eun, Sang Jun, Kang, Sungchan, Jang, Won Mo, Jung, Hyemin, Kim, Yoon, Lee, Jin Yong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6689488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31392852
http://dx.doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e190
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Although effective care for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is well known, considerable inadequate care has been still existed. Variations in achievement of the recommended quality indicators inT2DM care among small areas are not well known in Korea. This study examined the quality of care T2DM care and its geographical variations. METHODS: We used the national health insurance database and national health screening database. Seven quality indicators were used to evaluate continuity of care (medication possession ratio), process of care (hemoglobin A1c test, lipid profile, microalbuminuria test, and eye examination), and intermediate outcome (blood pressure control, and low-density lipoprotein control). Crude and age-standardized proportions were calculated for each 252 districts in Korea. RESULTS: All quality indicators failed to achieve the recommended level. Only about 3% and 15% of the patients underwent eye examination and microalbuminuria test, respectively. Other indicators ranged from 48% to 68%. Wide variation in the quality existed among districts and indicators. Eye examination and microalbuminuria test varied the most showing tenfold (0.9%–9.2%) and fourfold (6.3%–28.9%) variation by districts, respectively. There were 32.4 and 42.7 percentage point gap between the best and the worst districts in hemoglobin A1c test and blood pressure control, respectively. CONCLUSION: Considerable proportion of T2DM patients were not adequately managed and quality of care varied substantially district to district. To improve the quality of diabetes care, it is necessary to identify the poor performance areas and establish a well-coordinated care system tailored to the need of the district.