We have located links that may give you full text access.
Measuring the quality of care of diabetic patients at the specialist outpatient clinics in public hospitals in Singapore.
Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore 2007 December
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to measure the quality of care for patients with diabetes mellitus at selected Specialist Outpatient Clinics (SOCs) in the National Healthcare Group.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cross-sectional study reviewed case-records of patients from 6 medical specialties who were on continuous care for a minimum of 15 months from October 2003 to April 2005. Disproportionate sampling of 60 patients from each specialty, excluding those co-managed by Diabetes Centres or primary care clinics for diabetes, was carried out. Information on demographic characteristics, process indicators and intermediate outcomes were collected and the adherence rate for each process indicator compared across specialties. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 13.0.
RESULTS: A total of 575 cases were studied. The average rate for 9 process indicators by specialty ranged from 47.8% to 70.0%, with blood pressure measurement consistently high across all specialties (98.4%). There was significant variation (P <0.001) in rates across the specialties for 8 process indicators; HbA1c, serum creatinine and lipid profile tests were over 75%, while the rest were below 50%. The mean HbA1c was 7.3% +/- 1.5%. "Optimal" control of HbA1c was achieved in 51.2% of patients, while 50.6% of the patients achieved "optimal" low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol control. However, 47.3% of patients had "poor" blood pressure control. Adherence to process indicators was not associated with good intermediate outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: There was large variance in the adherence rate of process and clinical outcome indicators across specialties, which could be improved further.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cross-sectional study reviewed case-records of patients from 6 medical specialties who were on continuous care for a minimum of 15 months from October 2003 to April 2005. Disproportionate sampling of 60 patients from each specialty, excluding those co-managed by Diabetes Centres or primary care clinics for diabetes, was carried out. Information on demographic characteristics, process indicators and intermediate outcomes were collected and the adherence rate for each process indicator compared across specialties. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 13.0.
RESULTS: A total of 575 cases were studied. The average rate for 9 process indicators by specialty ranged from 47.8% to 70.0%, with blood pressure measurement consistently high across all specialties (98.4%). There was significant variation (P <0.001) in rates across the specialties for 8 process indicators; HbA1c, serum creatinine and lipid profile tests were over 75%, while the rest were below 50%. The mean HbA1c was 7.3% +/- 1.5%. "Optimal" control of HbA1c was achieved in 51.2% of patients, while 50.6% of the patients achieved "optimal" low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol control. However, 47.3% of patients had "poor" blood pressure control. Adherence to process indicators was not associated with good intermediate outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: There was large variance in the adherence rate of process and clinical outcome indicators across specialties, which could be improved further.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app