首页> 外文期刊>Journal of managed care pharmacy : >Impact of a clinical pharmacy program on changes in hemoglobin A1c, diabetes-related hospitalizations, and diabetes-related emergency department visits for patients with diabetes in an underserved population
【24h】

Impact of a clinical pharmacy program on changes in hemoglobin A1c, diabetes-related hospitalizations, and diabetes-related emergency department visits for patients with diabetes in an underserved population

机译:服务不足人群中的糖尿病患者,临床药房计划对血红蛋白A1c变化,糖尿病相关住院和糖尿病相关急诊就诊的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Diabetes mellitus is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. With the rise in prevalence of diabetes, there has been an increased need for clinical pharmacy services focused on diabetes management in ambulatory clinics. However, more data IS needed to determine the overall impact that clinical pharmacists have on preventing diabetesrelated inpatient admissions and emergency department (ED) visits for patients with diabetes, especially in an underserved population. Objectives: To assess the impact of clinical pharmacy services on the change in hemoglobin A1c measurements, the number of diabetes-related hospitalizations, and the number of diabetes-related ED visits for patients with uncontrolled diabetes. Methods: This was a retrospective study that evaluated outcomes for patients referred to a clinical pharmacist for management of diabetes, compared with patients who were not seen by a clinical pharmacist. Adult patients aged between 18 and 89 years with a diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus were identified, using the electronic medical records from CommUnityCare outpatient clinics in central Texas during the period July 1, 2007, through July 1, 2011. Patients enrolled had poor glycemic control, defined as an A1c ≥ 9% at baseline (index), with at least 3 visits with a clinical pharmacist or 3 visits to usual care. Patients with at least 1 year of pre-index data, 1 year of post-index follow-up, and a post-index A1c measure were included in the study. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to create a 1:1 cohort. T-tests were used to calculate results for the main outcome variables (change in A1c, change in number of diabetes-related hospitalizations, and change in number of diabetes-related ED visits). In addition, general linear models (GLM) were used to control for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: A total of 782 patients met inclusion criteria, 557 in the usual care (control) group and 225 in the clinical pharmacy (intervention) group. PS matching provided a 1:1 matched sample of 220 patients per cohort. When assessing the change in the number of diabetes-related hospitalizations from the pre-index year to the post-index year, patients in the control group had an increase of 8 hospitalizations (8 visits per 220 patients, mean = 0.036, SD = 0.284), while the intervention group had a decrease of 1 hospitalization (-1 visit per 220 patients, mean = - 0.005, SD=0.278). Both the t-test (P = 0.06) and GLM model (P = 0.06) indicated that the difference was statistically significant. When assessing the change in the number of diabetes-related ED visits from the pre-index year to the post-index year, we found patients in the control group had an increase of 16 ED visits (16 visits per 220 patients, mean = 0.073, SD = 0.584), while the interven-tion group had an increase of 4 ED visits (4 visits per 220 patients, mean = - 0.018, SD=0.641). Both the t-test (P = 0.18) and GLM model (P = 0.28) indicated that the difference was not statistically significant. A1c levels were reduced in the post-index period for both groups. For the control group, A1c reduction was 1.50 (from 11.17 to 9.67, SD = 2.49). For the intervention group, A1c reduction was 1.90 (from 11.09 to 9.19, SD = 2.44). Both the t-test (P = 0.04) and GLM model (P = 0.05) indicated that the A1c difference was statistically significant.Conclusions: Underserved patients with baseline uncontrolled diabetes who were managed by a clinical pharmacist in the outpatient setting had a higher decrease in A1c compared with usual care. The changes in diabetes-related hospitalizations and diabetes-related ED visits were in the hypothesized direction, but the comparison for ED visits was not statistically significant.
机译:背景:糖尿病与高发病率和高死亡率有关。随着糖尿病患病率的上升,对门诊诊所中专注于糖尿病管理的临床药房服务的需求在增加。但是,还需要更多数据来确定临床药剂师在预防糖尿病患者(尤其是服务水平欠佳的人群)中对糖尿病相关的住院患者和急诊科(ED)的访问产生的总体影响。目的:评估未经控制的糖尿病患者临床药房服务对血红蛋白A1c测量值变化,与糖尿病相关的住院次数以及与糖尿病相关的ED就诊次数的影响。方法:这是一项回顾性研究,评估了转诊至临床药剂师治疗糖尿病的患者与未见临床药剂师的患者的结局。根据2007年7月1日至2011年7月1日期间得克萨斯州中部的CommUnityCare门诊诊所的电子病历,确定了年龄在18至89岁之间的诊断为1型或2型糖尿病的成人患者。血糖控制不佳,定义为基线(指数)的A1c≥9%,至少有3次就诊的临床药剂师或3次就诊的常规护理。这项研究包括具有至少1年索引前数据,1年索引后随访以及索引后A1c量度的患者。倾向得分(PS)匹配用于创建1:1队列。 T检验用于计算主要结果变量的结果(A1c的变化,与糖尿病相关的住院治疗次数的变化以及与糖尿病相关的ED就诊次数的变化)。此外,一般线性模型(GLM)用于控制基线人口统计和临床特征。结果:符合入选标准的782例患者,常规护理(对照组)的557例,临床药学(干预)的225例。 PS匹配提供了每组220位患者的1:1匹配样本。在评估从指数前年份到指数后年份的糖尿病相关住院次数的变化时,对照组的患者住院次数增加了8次(每220名患者8次就诊,平均值= 0.036,SD = 0.284 ),而干预组的住院治疗减少了1次(每220名患者-1次就诊,平均值=-0.005,SD = 0.278)。 t检验(P = 0.06)和GLM模型(P = 0.06)均表明差异具有统计学意义。在评估从索引前年份到索引后年份的糖尿病相关ED访视次数的变化时,我们发现对照组患者的ED访视增加了16次(每220名患者16访视,平均值= 0.073 ,SD = 0.584),而干预组的急诊就诊次数增加了4次(每220名患者4次就诊,平均值=-0.018,标准差= 0.641)。 t检验(P = 0.18)和GLM模型(P = 0.28)均表明差异无统计学意义。两组的指数期后A1c水平均降低。对照组的A1c降低为1.50(从11.17降至9.67,SD = 2.49)。对于干预组,A1c降低为1.90(从11.09降至9.19,SD = 2.44)。 t检验(P = 0.04)和GLM模型(P = 0.05)均表明A1c差异具有统计学意义。结论:门诊环境中由临床药剂师管理的基线无控制的基线糖尿病患者,服务水平下降与通常的护理相比糖尿病相关住院和糖尿病相关急诊就诊的变化均处于假设的方向,但急诊就诊的比较无统计学意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号