Factors Associated With Intensification of Oral Diabetes Medications in Primary Care Provider-Patient Dyads: A Cohort Study

  1. Shari Danielle Bolen, MD, MPH1,
  2. Eric Bricker, MD, MPH2,
  3. T. Alafia Samuels, MD, MPH, PHD3,
  4. Hsin-Chieh Yeh, PHD145,
  5. Spyridon S. Marinopoulos, MD, MBA1,
  6. Maura McGuire, MD1,
  7. Marcela Abuid, MD6 and
  8. Frederick L. Brancati, MD, MHS145
  1. 1Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  2. 2Department of Medicine, Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano, Baylor Healthcare System, Plano, Texas
  3. 3Pan American Health Organization, Washington, D.C.
  4. 4Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
  5. 5Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
  6. 6Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts School of Medicine, Worcester, Massachusetts
  1. Corresponding author: Shari Bolen, sgolden4{at}jhmi.edu

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—Although suboptimal glycemic control is known to be common in diabetic adults, few studies have evaluated factors at the level of the physician-patient encounter. Our objective was to identify novel visit-based factors associated with intensification of oral diabetes medications in diabetic adults.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—We conducted a nonconcurrent prospective cohort study of 121 patients with type 2 diabetes and hyperglycemia (A1C ≥8%) enrolled in an academically affiliated managed-care program. Over a 24-month interval (1999–2001), we identified 574 hyperglycemic visits. We measured treatment intensification and factors associated with intensification at each visit.

RESULTS—Provider-patient dyads intensified oral diabetes treatment in only 128 (22%) of 574 hyperglycemic visits. As expected, worse glycemia was an important predictor of intensification. Treatment was more likely to be intensified for patients with visits that were “routine” (odds ratio [OR] 2.55 [95% CI 1.49–4.38]), for patients taking two or more oral diabetes drugs (2.82 [1.74–4.56]), or for patients with longer intervals between visits (OR per 30 days 1.05 [1.00–1.10]). In contrast, patients with less recent A1C measurements (OR >30 days before the visit 0.53 [0.34–0.85]), patients with a higher number of prior visits (OR per prior visit 0.94 [0.88–1.00]), and African American patients (0.59 [0.35–1.00]) were less likely to have treatment intensified.

CONCLUSIONS—Failure to intensify oral diabetes treatment is common in diabetes care. Quality improvement measures in type 2 diabetes should focus on overcoming inertia, improving continuity of care, and reducing racial disparities.

Footnotes

  • Published ahead of print at http://care.diabetesjournals.org on 17 October 2008.

    Funders provided financial resources only and did not contribute to the project otherwise.

    Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

    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.

    • Accepted October 6, 2008.
    • Received July 11, 2008.
« Previous | Next Article »Table of Contents