|
 |
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Diabetes Care 30:2013-2018, 2007
DOI: 10.2337/dc07-0520
© 2007 by the American Diabetes Association
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Epidemiology/Health Services Research |
"Damm Sokkor": Factors Associated With the Quality of Care of Patients With Diabetes
A study in primary care in Tunisia
From the Direction des Soins de Santé de Base (DSSB), Primary Health Care Department, Ministry of Public Health, Tunis, Tunisia
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Hugh Alberti, MRCGP, BP 66, 2073 Borj Louzir, Ariana, Tunisia. E-mail: hugh.alberti{at}newcastle.ac.uk
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
OBJECTIVE—To identify the organizational, physician, and patient factors associated with the quality of care of patients with diabetes in a low-/middle-income country.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Data from 2,160 randomly selected patients with diabetes were extracted from the manual medical records of a nationwide sample of 48 randomly selected health centers. Physician and organizational characteristics were collected from national reports, questionnaires, interviews, and observation at the centers. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were undertaken to identify associations with four quality-of-care scores, based on processes and intermediate outcomes of care and 53 potential explanatory factors.
RESULTS—The mean age of the study population was 62.4 years, mean duration of diabetes was 8.4 years, 62% were female, and 94% had type 2 diabetes. In the final multivariate models, factors independently and significantly associated with higher process-of-care scores were regional affluence, doctor motivation, and the use of chronic disease clinics (P < 0.05). Health centers with younger patients and increased availability of medication were independently and significantly associated with improved outcome-of-care scores (P < 0.05). The final models of the four quality-of-care scores explained 55–71% of the variations in scores.
CONCLUSIONS—Use of chronic disease clinics, availability of medication, and possibly doctor motivation appear to be the most strongly related modifiable factors influencing diabetes care. These findings will be used to develop and implement culturally appropriate quality improvement interventions to improve the quality of diabetes care. We recommend our findings be taken into account in other low-/middle-income countries.
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
Worldwide, the quality of care of patients with diabetes has been shown to be variable and suboptimal (1–6), despite the evidence that good control of blood pressure and glucose significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular and microvascular complications (7,8). The management of diabetes is acknowledged to be complex. The quality of diabetes care can be influenced by patient, health professional, and organizational factors (9–11). Commonly reported patient factors are adherence, attendance, and education together with individual characteristics such as age, sex, and presence of comorbidity (11–14). Health physician factors include the number, training, and sex of the treating physician and practice team; the role of clinical inertia; and the clinician/patient relationship (10,12,15–18). Many organizational factors have been shown to influence care such as the use of structured diabetes clinics, recall systems, practice guidelines, and educational programs (14,19).
Very few studies on the factors influencing the care of patients with diabetes have been reported from low-/middle-income countries, despite the fact that 80% of all chronic disease deaths worldwide now occur in such countries (20). None, to our knowledge, have used a nationwide sample from primary care, where most patients with diabetes are managed. It is crucial that quality improvement efforts are underpinned by more specific knowledge of modifiable factors amenable to change in order to efficiently target improvement strategies, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Tunisia, a low-/middle-income country, is experiencing a major increase in noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes (21). In response, the Tunisian Ministry of Health have initiated a national program of diabetes management within primary care with the aim of improving the quality of care (22); the program was initiated in 1993 and extended to the whole country in 1998. The program incorporates teaching of primary health care doctors and the use of national, standardized protocols, disease registers, and disease-specific medical records. There has also been an emphasis on patient education, prioritizing the availability of medications for chronic diseases and introducing weekly chronic disease clinics.
We sought to identify the patient, physician, and organizational factors that are associated with the quality of care of patients with diabetes using Tunisia as an illustrative example of a low-/middle-income country.
|
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS— |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
Tunisia is a country of 10 million inhabitants, situated on the North African coast. There are
2,000 public sector, primary care health centers situated throughout the 24 regions of the country. The majority of these centers are small, nurse-ran health posts that do not manage patients with chronic diseases; we therefore chose to include only health centers that hold medical consultations four or more times a week (n = 567). Two health centers were randomly selected from each region using data obtained from the Ministry of Public Health. Patient data were extracted from manual medical records. A maximum of 50 patients with diabetes were randomly selected per health center. Patient details included demographic data, clinical background, processes of care (i.e., whether a measurement had been recorded in a 12-month period), outcomes of care (i.e., the result of the measurement), and prescriptions of blood glucose–lowering, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering medication. Physician and organizational characteristics were collected from national and health center reports, a structured questionnaire administered at each center and interviews with the staff at the health centers. Explanatory factors were selected on the basis of research findings elsewhere and exploratory qualitative work in Tunisia (23) (Table 1).
|
Quality-of-care measures
The quality-of-care indicators were based on two process-of-care scores and two outcome-of-care scores. The process-of-care scores were calculated based on recommendations from the Tunisian national program (21), namely assessments of fasting glucose, blood pressure, weight, total cholesterol, creatinine, foot examination, cardiovascular examination, electrocardiogram, eye examination, and A1C. The latter four tests usually require referral to a local hospital, as they cannot be performed on site at the health center. Following a model proposed by Gulliford et al. (4) in Trinidad and Tobago, we combined the process-of-care results to create two quality-of-care scores.
Nonweighted process-of-care score.
Nonweighted process-of-care scores were obtained by assigning to each patient a score of 1 for each measurement undertaken in the previous 12-month period (maximum score: 10).
Weighted process-of-care score.
To take into account the importance of glycemic and blood pressure control, a score was calculated in which glucose and blood pressure measurement were given a weighted score of 4 rather than 1; the other measurements remained with a score of 1 (maximum score: 16). The outcome-of-care scores were based on levels of fasting glucose, blood pressure, total cholesterol, and BMI. The assessment was based on an average of all the results collected per patient.
Four-variable outcome-of-care score.
An outcome-of-care score was calculated based on how many of the following targets a patient achieved: blood pressure <140/80 mmHg, fasting glucose 
7.8 mmol/l, total cholesterol 5 mmol/l, and BMI 25 kg/m2 (24). Missing data were excluded. A score was assigned to each patient based on the proportion of targets achieved.
Two-variable outcome-of-care score.
A second outcome-of-care score was calculated using fasting glucose and blood pressure levels only. The scoring system used a range from good control (using definitions above), borderline control, and poor control (defined as blood pressure 
160/95 mmHg and fasting glucose 11.1 mmol/l). Each patient was assigned a score of 2 for good control, 1 for borderline control, and 0 for poor control for both fasting glucose and blood pressure using a denominator of 2 (if only one variable recorded) or 4 (if both variables recorded). A mean of each of the four scores was calculated for each health center. The scores were assessed for normality, and the value of Cronbach's 
was calculated to measure the internal consistency of each score.
Statistical analysis
The health center was used as the unit of randomization in order to cluster patients into practices, as recommended in primary care studies (25). All explanatory variables were first tested against each of the outcome variables (quality-of-care scores) using ANOVA (categorical variables) or linear regression (continuous variables). Logarithmic transformations were made for variables not normally distributed; if the variable remained not normally distributed, the variable was converted into a categorical variable. Analyses were weighted for number of patients per center and date of data collection. Potentially significant variables (P < 0.15) were entered into three separate multilinear regression models, grouping variables into patient, health professional, or organizational with each of the outcome variables as the dependent variable. Potentially significant variables (P < 0.15) from each of the three separate models were then entered into a final regression model against each outcome variable. The data were analyzed using SPSS software package (version 12.0.1). Approval for the study was granted by the Tunisian Ministry of Public Health.
|
RESULTS— |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
A total of 2,160 patients with diabetes were selected for medical record review from 48 health centers; the mean age of patients in the study was 62.4 years, mean duration of diabetes was 8.4 years, 62% were female, and 94% had type 2 diabetes.
A mean of 45 patients were selected per health center. The ratio of urban to rural health centers was 2:1. Health centers had a mean of 2.1 primary care doctors and 5.6 nurses, and 20% had a nutritionist available for patients with diabetes. On average, each health center served a population of 15,986 and managed 162 patients with diabetes, and 26 patients attended per clinic per doctor. Among the 48 health centers, 85% had the new disease-specific medical records available, 70% had a chronic disease register, 63% used patient-held records, 79% had a weekly chronic disease clinic, 39% had an electrocardiogram machine on site, 93% had a glucometer on site, and 57% ran regular patient education sessions. Table 2 depicts selected patient characteristics, and Table 3 depicts the results of the process and intermediate outcomes of care of the study population. All four quality-of-care scores were normally distributed. Internal consistency was high for the process-of-care scores (0.84 and 0.81) but lower for the outcome-of-care scores (0.58 and 0.29) due to the lower number of variables incorporated.
|
|
Multivariate linear regression analyses
Univariate analysis demonstrated a potential association among 16, 18, 13, and 11 of 53 explanatory factors with the four quality-of-care indicators (nonweighted process-of-care, weighted process-of-care, four-variable outcome-of-care, and two-variable outcome-of-care scores, respectively; online appendix [available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc07-0520). All factors potentially related to each quality-of-care indicator were entered into the three separate multilinear regression models, grouping factors into patient, health professional, or organizational. Factors that remained potentially significant were entered into a final regression model for each indicator, and these are demonstrated in Table 4. The final models explained 71.3% (nonweighted process-of-care score), 62.7% (weighted process-of-care score), 64.4% (four-variable outcome-of-care score), and 55.9% (two-variable outcome-of-care score) of the variations in scores.
|
|
CONCLUSIONS— |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
We report the first nationwide study from primary care of the factors that influence the care of patients with diabetes from a low-/middle-income country. Use of chronic disease clinics, availability of medication, and doctor motivation appear to be the most strongly related modifiable factors influencing diabetes care in our context. The other factors that were independently and significantly associated with improved processes or outcomes of care were regional affluence and younger age.
Standards of care
The process-of-care results show that the majority of patients are having their blood pressure and fasting glucose recorded annually. These results compare favorably with studies from similar countries (4–6,26,27). Around half of the patients have most of the other measures performed annually. Fewer patients are recorded as having an electrocardiogarm, eye examination, and A1C measurement. The latter is almost certainly due to the fact that this test is not generally available within primary care. The low recording of eye and electrocardiogram examinations may be due to the fact that these tests are usually performed in secondary care; primary care physicians report difficulties in persuading patients to attend and in receiving the results from secondary care. Since the time of the study, training of primary care doctors in the use of ophthalmoscopes has been introduced, and it is hoped that this will improve the uptake of eye examinations. Particularly striking is the variation in results between health centers as has been demonstrated in other countries (3,4). The percentage of patients achieving targets of blood pressure, fasting glucose, and cholesterol is variable and suboptimal but again compares favorably with results from other countries (4,5,26).
Factors associated with improved quality of care
Assessing the relative influence of specific factors that influence diabetes care is essential for the development of targeted interventions to improve the quality of care. Our study showed five factors to be clearly associated with improved processes or outcomes of care: regional affluence, doctor motivation, use of chronic disease clinics (processes), younger age, and increased availability of medication (outcomes).
An association between affluence and quality of care has been demonstrated previously in studies from the developed world (11,28), and it appears that this influence is equally important in less affluent countries. Financial aspects strongly influence the care of patients, especially those with chronic diseases, from developing nations (29).
The significant influence of doctor motivation is perhaps unexpected. Historically, more emphasis has been placed on the training and education of clinicians rather than their attitudes and beliefs, but motivation of the health professionals is increasingly being recognized as having as central role in diabetes care (12). However, this finding must be approached with caution given the subjective nature of the term "motivation," even within the context of a theoretical model (30), and the subjective method of data collection (interviews and observations). Further investigation is required using more formal methods, such as validated questionnaires or surveys, to confirm this potential discovery. The introduction of weekly chronic disease clinics at most of the health centers studied seems to have been a major success in improving the quality of diabetes care in Tunisia. Structured care in the primary care setting has been shown in systematic reviews from developed nations to be associated with improved quality (19), and our findings suggest that these results can be generalized to less affluent nations. The association of younger age with improved outcomes of care seems to be related to the inclusion of BMI and cholesterol in the four-variable outcome-of-care score. A national nutrition survey in Tunisia 10 years ago demonstrated the association of age with BMI and cholesterol in Tunisia, as in other countries (31).
Finally, the association of improved outcomes of care at health centers with increased availability of medication suggests a direct link between intermediate patient outcomes and medication availability. In the Tunisian public sector, medications are free with the payment of a small consultation fee. If the medications are unavailable, patients are required to buy them privately from pharmacists, and many cannot afford to do so. Other authors from developing nations have stressed the essential role of the provision of medication (29,32). One of the aims of the Tunisian national program has been to prioritize the supply of medicines for chronic diseases, and our evidence supports this initiative.
Quality-of-care indicators
Quality of health care is a multidimensional concept that has been identified as including a combination of access (assessed in our study by processes of care) and effectiveness (assessed by outcomes of care) (33). Much debate has centered on the use of processes or outcomes to assess quality of care (34). We chose to use a combination of process and outcome measures in an attempt to give a more accurate overall picture of the factors influencing both the recording of care and the achievement of clinical outcomes. We recognize that our outcome variables are intermediate and not long term; it is not possible at present to identify long-term outcomes, such as complication and mortality rates, in our setting.
Strengths and weaknesses of the study
Our study is the first nationwide study from primary care on the factors that influence diabetes care from a low-/middle-income country to be reported. In addition, it is one of the first to incorporate an extensive number and range of potential variables, including patient, health professional, and organizational factors. Selection of the variables was based on exploratory, qualitative work from Tunisia (23) in addition to reported findings from elsewhere. Our inclusion of >50 potential factors, though larger than previous studies, is not exhaustive, and other unexplored factors may be playing a role. However, it is reassuring to note that our final models did explain most of the variations in quality scores observed. Certain explanatory variables could be subject to bias; for example, availability of medication was based on reports from staff rather than an objective measure.
Based on a two-stage randomized procedure, our study is nationally representative of the public sector primary care management of patients with diabetes, covering >150,000 patients throughout the country. It is possible that some of the factors discovered may be contextual and not transferable to other settings. Nonetheless, being one of the first and largest studies to be reported from a low-/middle-income country, we would suggest that our findings are more likely to be relevant to other similar countries than previous work from developed nations.
In summary, we found the use of chronic disease clinics, the availability of medication, and possibly doctor motivation to be the most strongly related modifiable factors influencing the quality of diabetes care in the Tunisian primary care setting. We suggest that our findings be evaluated in other settings. However, it is unlikely that such a large, encompassing study can be undertaken in every context, particularly in less affluent nations. We would therefore recommend that clinicians, managers, and health policymakers take our results into consideration in order to develop and implement culturally appropriate quality improvement interventions in other low-/middle-income countries.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank all the staff at the primary care health centers for their hospitality and assistance. We are also grateful for helpful advice from Rudy Bilous, Nigel Oswald, Janine Gray, Tom Chadwick, George Alberti, Robbie Foy, and colleagues at the DSSB.
A summary of this article was presented at the International Diabetes Federation Conference, South Africa, 2006.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Published ahead of print at http://care.diabetesjournals.org on 16 May 2007. DOI: 10.2337/dc07-0520.
Additional information for this article can be found in an online appendix at http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc07-0520.
In Tunisian Arabic, "damm" means blood pressure and "sokkor" means diabetes.
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Received for publication March 15, 2007. Accepted for publication May 7, 2007.
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--RESULTS--CONCLUSIONS--References |
|---|
- Saaddine JB, Cadwell B, Gregg EW, Engelgau MM, Vinicor FF, Imperatore G, Narayan KM: Improvements in diabetes processes of care and intermediate outcomes: United States, 1988–2002. Ann Intern Med 144:465–477, 2006
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Campbell SM, Roland MO, Middleton E, Reeves D: Improvements in quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998–2003: longitudinal observational study. BMJ 331:1121–1125, 2005
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Arday DR, Fleming BB, Keller DK, Pendergrass PW, Vaughn RJ, Turpin JM, Nicewander DA: Variation in diabetes care among states. Diabetes Care 25:2230–2237, 2002
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Gulliford MC, Mahabir D, Ukoumunne OC: Evaluating variations in medical practice between government primary care health centres. J Clin Epidemiol 54:511–517, 2001[Medline]
- Nagpal J, Bhartia: A Quality of diabetes care in the middle- and high-income group populace. Diabetes Care 29:2341–2348, 2006
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Reed RL, Revel AD, Carter AO, Saadi HF, Dunn EV: A controlled before-after trial of structured diabetes care in primary health centres in a newly developed country. Int J Qual Health Care 17:281–286, 2005
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group: Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional therapy and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 34. Lancet 352:854–865, 1998[Medline]
- U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group: Tight blood pressure and risk of microvascular and macrovascular complications of type II diabetes: UKPDS 38. BMJ 317:701–713, 1998[Medline]
- Brown BB, Harris SB, Webster-Bogaert S, Wetmore S, Faulds C, Stewart M: The role of patient, physician and systemic factors in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Fam Pract 19:344–349, 2002
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Khunti K: Use of multiple methods to determine factors affecting quality of care of patients with diabetes. Fam Pract 16:489–494, 1999
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Pringle M, Stewart-Evans C, Coupland C, Williams I, Allison S, Sterland J: Influences on control in diabetes mellitus: patient, doctor, practice or delivery of care? BMJ 306:630–634, 1993[Medline]
- Simmons D, Lillis S, Swan J, Haar J: Discordance in perceptions of barriers to diabetes care between patients and primary care and secondary care. Diabetes Care 30:490–495, 2007
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Clark M, Hampson SE: Comparison of patients’ and health care professionals’ beliefs about and attitudes toward type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med 20:152–154, 2003[Medline]
- Ward MM, Yankey JW, Vaughn TE, BootsMiller BJ, Flach SD, Welke KF, Penderghast JF, Perlin J, Doebbeling BN: Physician process and patient outcome measures for diabetes care: relationships to organisational characteristics. Med Care 42:840–850, 2004[Medline]
- Sutton M, McLean G: Determinants of primary medical care quality measured under the new UK contract: cross sectional study. BMJ 332:389–390, 2006
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Pellegrini F, Belfiglio M, De Berardis G, Franciosi M, Di Nardo B, Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Sacco M, Tognoni G, Valentini M, Corrado D, D'Ettorre A, Nicolucci A, the QuED Study Group: Role of organizational factors in poor blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Arch Intern Med 163:473–480, 2003
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Larme AC, Pugh JA: Attitudes of primary care providers toward diabetes: barriers to guideline implementation. Diabetes Care 21:1391–1396, 1998[Abstract]
- Phillips LS, Branch WT, Cook CB, Doyle JP, El-Kebbi IM, Gallina DL, Miller CD, Ziemer DC, Barnes CS: Clinical inertia. Ann Intern Med 135:825–834, 2001
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Griffin S, Kinmouth AL: Systems for routine surveillance for people with diabetes mellitus. Nurs Times 97:44, 2001[Medline]
- World Health Organization: Preventing Chronic Diseases: A Vital Investment. A World Health Organization Global Report. Geneva, World Health Org., 2006
- Bouguerra R, Alberti H, Salem LB, Rayana CB, Atti JE, Gaigi S, Slama CB, Zouari B, Alberti K: The global diabetes pandemic: the Tunisian experience. Eur J Clin Nutr 61:160–165, 2007[Medline]
- Ministère de la Santé Publique: Programme National de Prise en Charge des Diabétiques dans les Structures de 1ère Ligne. Tunis, Tunisïa, Ministère de la Santé Publique, 2001
- Alberti H: "Sokkor": research into the contextual facilitators and barriers involved in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus must now intensify and extend into all cultures worldwide (Letter). Fam Pract 20:94, 2003
[Free Full Text] - Diabetes U.K. Recommendations for the Management of Diabetes in Primary Care. 2nd ed. London, Diabetes UK, 2000
- Grimshaw JM, Campbell MK, Eccles MP, Steen IN: Experimental and quasi-experimental guideline implementation strategies. Fam Pract 17 (Suppl. 1):S11–S18, 2000
- Akel H, Hamadeh G: Quality of diabetes care in a university health center in Lebanon. Int J Qual Health Care 11:517–521, 1999
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - El-Shazly M, Abdel-Fattah M, Zaki A, Bedwani R, Assad S, Tognoni G, Nicolucci A: Health care for diabetic patients in developing countries: a case from Egypt. Public Health 114:276–281, 2000[Medline]
- Hippisley-Cox J, O'Hanlon S, Coupland C: Association of deprivation, ethnicity, and sex with quality indicators for diabetes: population based survey of 53,000 patients in primary care. BMJ 329:1267–1269, 2004
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Whiting DR, Hayes L, Unwin NC: Diabetes in Africa: challenges to health care for diabetes in Africa. J Cardiovasc Risk 10:103–110, 2003[Medline]
- Armitage CJ, Conner M: Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol 40:471–499, 2001[Medline]
- Bouguerra R, Ben Salem L, Alberti H, Ben Rayana C, El Khadhi A, El Alti J, Gaigi S, Ben Slana C, Zouari B: The prevalence of metabolic abnormalities in the Tunisian adult: a population based study. Diabetes Metab 32:215–221, 2006[Medline]
- De-Graft Aikins A: Healer shopping in Africa: new evidence from rural-urban qualitative study of Ghanaian diabetes experiences. BMJ 331:737, 2005
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Campbell SM, Roland MO, Buetow S: Defining quality of care. Soc Sci Med 51:1611–1625, 2000[Medline]
- Davies HTO, Crombie IK: Assessing the quality of care. BMJ 311:766, 1995
[Free Full Text]
CiteULike 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Diabetes | Diabetes Care | Clinical Diabetes | Diabetes Spectrum |