Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Is Associated With Barriers to Activity and Worse Health Status: A Cross-Sectional Study in Primary Care.

Introduction: Many individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) experience "psychological insulin resistance". Consequently, it could be expected that insulin therapy may have negative effects on psychological outcomes and well-being. Therefore, this study compared health status and psychosocial functioning of individuals with T2DM using only oral antihyperglycemic agents (OHA) and on insulin therapy (with or without OHA). Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we used baseline data of a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 55 Dutch general practices in 2005. Health status was measured with the Short Form (SF)-36 (scale 0-100) and psychosocial functioning with the Diabetes Health Profile (DHP, scale 0-100). To handle missing data, we performed multiple imputation. We used linear mixed models with random intercepts per general practice to correct for clustering at practice level and to control for confounding. Results: In total, 2,794 participants were included in the analysis, their mean age was 65.8 years and 50.8% were women. Insulin-users (n = 212) had a longer duration of T2DM (11.0 versus 5.6 years) and more complications. After correcting for confounders and multiple comparisons, insulin-users reported significantly worse outcomes on vitality (SF-36, adjusted difference -5.7, p=0.033), general health (SF-36, adjusted difference -4.8, p=0.043), barriers to activity (DHP, adjusted difference -7.2, p<0.001), and psychological distress (DHP, adjusted difference -3.7, p=0.004), all on a 0-100 scale. Discussion: While previous studies showed similar or better health status in people with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin therapy, we found that vitality, general health and barriers to activity were worse in those on insulin therapy. Although the causality of this association cannot be established, our findings add to the discussion on the effects of insulin treatment on patient-reported outcomes in daily practice.

Effects of the Proactive Interdisciplinary Self-Management (PRISMA) Program on Online Care Platform Usage in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Online care platforms can support patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in managing their health. However, in the use of eHealth, a low participation rate is common. The Proactive Interdisciplinary Self-Management (PRISMA) program, aimed at improving patients' self-management skills, was expected to encourage patients to manage their disease through the use of an online platform. Therefore, the objective of the current study was to investigate whether a group education program can improve the use of an online care platform in patients with T2DM treated by primary care providers in the Netherlands. In a randomized controlled trial, patients with T2DM received either PRISMA with usual care or usual care only. During a six-month follow-up period in 2014-2015, usage (number of log-ons and time spent per session) of an online care platform (e-Vita) aimed at improving T2DM self-management was assessed. A training about the functionalities of e-Vita was offered. The sample consisted of 203 patients. No differences were found between the intervention and control groups in the number of patients who attended the platform training (interested patients) (X 2(1) = 0.58; p = 0.45), and the number of patients who logged on at least once (platform users) (X 2(1) = 0.46; p = 0.50). In addition, no differences were found between the groups in the type of users-patients who logged on twice or more (active users) or patients who logged on once (nonactive users) (X 2(1) = 0.56; p = 0.45). The PRISMA program did not change platform usage in patients with T2DM. In addition, only a small proportion of the patients logged on twice or more. Patients probably need other encouragements to manage their condition using an online platform.

Effects of the Proactive interdisciplinary self-management (PRISMA) program on self-reported and clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes self-management education can be helpful for patients with type 2 diabetes in managing their condition. We aimed to study the effects of the group-based PRoactive Interdisciplinary Self-MAnagement (PRISMA) training program on self-reported and clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes treated in general practice. METHODS: Persons aged 18 years or older diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and treated in primary care were included. In a randomized controlled trial design (1:1), patients were followed for 6 months with an extension phase of 6 months. Block randomization was used. The patients with type 2 diabetes received either PRISMA in addition to usual care or usual care only. All patients completed a range of validated questionnaires (including knowledge, skills, and confidence for self-management [PAM], diabetes self-care behavior [SDSCA], health-related quality of life [EQ-5D], and emotional well-being [WHO-5]). In addition, clinical outcomes (HbA1c, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, and cholesterol levels) were collected during the routine diabetes checkups. RESULTS: Of the total sample (n = 193), 60.1% were men. The mean age was 69.9 years (SD = 9.1). No significant differences were found on self-reported outcomes between the groups at 0, 6, and 12 months. The clinical outcomes were not reported due to a large number of missing values. CONCLUSION: PRISMA did not improve self-reported outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care. It was not possible to make a statement about the clinical effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: date: 16/07/2014, number: NL4550 (https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/4550).

A case study of nurse practitioner care compared with general practitioner care for children with respiratory tract infections.

AIM: To compare quality of care provided by nurse practitioners (NP) with care provided by general practitioners (GP) for children with respiratory tract infections (RTI) in the Netherlands. BACKGROUND: Nurse practitioners increasingly manage acute conditions in general practice, with opportunities for more protocolled care. Studies on quality of NPs' care for children with RTIs are limited to the US healthcare system and do not take into account baseline differences in illness severity. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. METHODS: Data were extracted from electronic healthcare records of children 0-6 years presenting with RTI between January-December 2013. Primary outcomes were antibiotic prescriptions and early return visits. Generalized estimating equations were used to correct for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 899 RTI consultations were assessed (168 seen by NP; 731 by GP). Baseline characteristics differed between these groups. Overall antibiotic prescription and early return visit rates were 21% and 24%, respectively. Adjusted odds ratio for antibiotic prescription after NP vs. GP delivered care was 1.40 (95% confidence interval 0.89-2.22) and for early return visits 1.53 (95% confidence interval 1.01-2.31). Important confounder for antibiotic prescription was illness severity. Presence of wheezing was a confounder for return visits. Complication and referral rates did not differ. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic prescription, complication and referral rates for paediatric RTI consultations did not differ significantly between NP and GP consultations, after correction for potential confounders. General practitioners, however, see more severely ill children and have a lower return visit rate. A randomised controlled study is needed to determine whether NP care quality is truly noninferior.

Computerized decision support systems in primary care for type 2 diabetes patients only improve patients' outcomes when combined with feedback on performance and case management: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are often part of a multifaceted intervention to improve diabetes care. We reviewed the effects of CDSSs alone or in combination with other supportive tools in primary care for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for January 1990-July 2011 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database and by consulting reference lists. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in general practice were selected if the interventions consisted of a CDSS alone or combined with a reminder system and/or feedback on performance and/or case management. The intervention had to be compared with usual care. Two pairs of reviewers independently abstracted all available data. The data were categorized by process of care and patient outcome measures. RESULTS: Twenty RCTs met inclusion criteria. In 14 studies a CDSS was combined with another intervention. Two studies were left out of the analysis because of low quality. Four studies with a CDSS alone and four studies with a CDSS and reminders showed improvements of the process of care. CDSS with feedback on performance with or without reminders improved the process of care (one study) and patient outcome (two studies). CDSS with case management improved patient outcome (two studies). CDSS with reminders, feedback on performance, and case management improved both patient outcome and the process of care (two studies). CONCLUSIONS: CDSSs used by healthcare providers in primary T2DM care are effective in improving the process of care; adding feedback on performance and/or case management may also improve patient outcome.

Cost-effectiveness of the diabetes care protocol, a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention that reduces cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVE: The Diabetes Care Protocol (DCP), a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention, reduces cardiovascular risk of type 2 diabetic patients. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of DCP from a Dutch health care perspective. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cluster randomized trial provided data of DCP versus usual care. The 1-year follow-up patient data were extrapolated using a modified Dutch microsimulation diabetes model, computing individual lifetime health-related costs, and health effects. Incremental costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) were estimated using multivariate generalized estimating equations to correct for practice-level clustering and confounding. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were created. Stroke costs were calculated separately. Subgroup analyses examined patients with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD+ or CVD- patients, respectively). RESULTS: Excluding stroke, DCP patients lived longer (0.14 life-years, P = NS), experienced more QALYs (0.037, P = NS), and incurred higher total costs (euro 1,415, P = NS), resulting in an ICER of euro 38,243 per QALY gained. The likelihood of cost-effectiveness given a willingness-to-pay threshold of euro 20,000 per QALY gained is 30%. DCP had a more favorable effect on CVD+ patients (ICER = euro 14,814) than for CVD- patients (ICER = euro 121,285). Coronary heart disease costs were reduced (euro-587, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: DCP reduces cardiovascular risk, resulting in only a slight improvement in QALYs, lower CVD costs, but higher total costs, with a high cost-effectiveness ratio. Cost-effective care can be achieved by focusing on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients with a history of CVD.

The association between erectile dysfunction and cardiovascular risk in men with Type 2 diabetes in primary care: it is a matter of age.

AIMS: Erectile dysfunction (ED) prevalence is usually based on questionnaires, too elaborate for daily practice. The single question for ED prevalence is unknown. Literature reports an independent association between ED and both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes. Whether routinely asking men with Type 2 diabetes (DM2) about ED identifies those at elevated risk for CVD is unknown. We assessed cardiovascular risk of DM2 men with ED. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study in primary care. During annual check-up, the practice nurse asked 1823 DM2 men: "Do you have erection problems? Yes/no." ED prevalence rate was calculated. Age, medication, and other known factors associated with ED and/or CVD were used in univariate analysis (odds ratio [OR], Student's t test, and Mann-Whitney test). This revealed confounding variables used in the multivariable analysis. The association between ED and history of cardiovascular disease (HCVD) was assessed by logistic regression analysis. In patients with no HCVD, we assessed the association between ED and 10-year United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) coronary heart disease risk by linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of ED in DM2 patients was 41.3%. There was no independent association between ED and HCVD [adjusted OR, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.9-1.5)]. The 10-year UKPDS CHD risk difference between men with and without ED was 5.9% (95% CI, 3.2-8.7), but after adjustment for age, this association disappeared [adjusted risk difference, 0.6% (95% CI, -1.5 to 2.7)]. CONCLUSION: The ED prevalence rate assessed by a single question was comparable to that assessed by questionnaires. ED neither did independently relate to patients' cardiovascular history nor to cardiovascular risk.

Combined task delegation, computerized decision support, and feedback improve cardiovascular risk for type 2 diabetic patients: a cluster randomized trial in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: The Diabetes Care Protocol combines task delegation (a practice nurse), computerized decision support, and feedback every 3 months. We studied the effect of the Diabetes Care Protocol on A1C and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients in primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a cluster randomized trial, mean changes in cardiovascular risk factors between the intervention and control groups after 1 year were calculated by generalized linear models. RESULTS: Throughout the Netherlands, 26 intervention practices included 1,699 patients and 29 control practices 1,692 patients. The difference in A1C change was not significant, whereas total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and blood pressure improved significantly more in the intervention group. The 10-year coronary heart disease risk estimate of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study improved 1.4% more in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: Delegation of routine diabetes care to a practice nurse combined with computerized decision support and feedback did not improve A1C but reduced cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes patients.

Task delegation and computerized decision support reduce coronary heart disease risk factors in type 2 diabetes patients in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Reducing cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) is important in diabetes care. However, treating patients according to clinical guidelines appears to be difficult. Delegating routine tasks to a practice nurse combined with computerized decision support systems (CDSS) may be helpful. The objective was to study the effectiveness of practice nurse-managed CDSS for diabetes care on improving cardiovascular risk factors in DM2 patients. METHODS: In 113 primary care practices (n = 7,893 DM2 patients) across the Netherlands, the diabetes care protocol (DCP) was assessed in a before-after study, lasting 1 year. All practices implemented DCP, which is characterized by delegation of routine tasks in diabetes care to a practice nurse, software that supports diabetes management, medical decisions, and benchmarking (CDSS). All DM2 patients treated by their primary care physician were asked to attend the program. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients achieving treatment targets: hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)