Cargando…
Quality of Diabetes and Hypertension Management at the DAWN (Dedicated to Aurora’s Wellness and Needs) Student-Run Free Clinic
Introduction Student-Run Free Clinics (SRFCs) are part of the safety-net healthcare system. Given variable settings and models, relatively little is known about the quality of care in these settings. Methods A mixed-methods evaluation of diabetes and hypertension management was conducted for patient...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7470669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32905511 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.9539 |
Sumario: | Introduction Student-Run Free Clinics (SRFCs) are part of the safety-net healthcare system. Given variable settings and models, relatively little is known about the quality of care in these settings. Methods A mixed-methods evaluation of diabetes and hypertension management was conducted for patients initiating care from March 1, 2015, to September 31, 2016, at the DAWN (Dedicated to Aurora’s Wellness and Needs) SRFC. Retrospective chart review assessed whether patients received recommended screening tests (process outcomes) and achieved disease control (short-term outcomes). These outcomes were compared to a local community health center (CHC), a local federally qualified health center (FQHC) network, and Colorado Medicaid (CoM) using one proportion t-tests. In-depth case studies of randomly selected individuals with good and poor disease control identified targets for quality improvement through nominal group technique. Results Diabetic patients (n=30) were recommended screening, including HbA1c (93.3%) (vs. 77.8% with CoM, p=0.04), nephropathy care (70%) (vs. 85.4% with CoM, p=0.02), retinopathy examination (30%) (vs. 40.47% with CoM, p=0.24). Diabetic short-term outcomes showed 46.6% with poor control (vs. 61.1% at the CHC, p=0.10; vs. 30.62% at the FQHC, p=0.06; vs. 55% with CoM, p=0.10). Patients with hypertension (n=75) 33.3% had controlled (<140/90) blood pressure (vs. 49.2% at the CHC, p<0.01; vs. 61.1% at the FQHC, p<0.01; vs. 58.9% with CoM, p<0.01). Themes for quality improvement included improving follow-up, documentation and data collection, clinic processes, and addressing barriers to care. Discussion DAWN outcomes were comparable to other safety-net providers for diabetes, similar to findings in evaluations conducted by other SRFCs. However, DAWN did not have equivalent outcomes for hypertension in contrast to other published findings from SRFCs. Poor access to care and baseline chronic disease control among DAWN patients may have contributed to these findings. Conclusions While this study is not directly generalizable to all SRFC models and communities, these results contribute to the growing body of data around SRFCs and chronic disease management and indicate that SRFCs may have a role in the safety-net healthcare system. However, more study is needed to ensure that SRFCs can provide high-quality care because otherwise efforts should focus on other strategies to expand access within the safety-net system. |
---|