Diabetes group medical visits and outcomes of care in low-income, rural, uninsured persons.

Jennifer A Mallow, Laurie A Theeke, Tara Whetsel, Emily R Barnes
{"title":"Diabetes group medical visits and outcomes of care in low-income, rural, uninsured persons.","authors":"Jennifer A Mallow,&nbsp;Laurie A Theeke,&nbsp;Tara Whetsel,&nbsp;Emily R Barnes","doi":"10.4236/ojn.2013.33043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of Diabetes Group Medical Visits (DGMVs) verses usual care in a sample of low-income patients with diabetes receiving care at a rural free clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected through chart review, using direct data entry into Microsoft Access. Participants were included if they met the inclusion criteria: 1) age ≥ 18 years; 2) diagnosis of diabetes; 3) uninsured and received care between May 2007 and August 2009. Fifty-three participants attended DGMVs and were compared to 58 participants who received usual care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The personal characteristics and biophysical measures of this population differed from previously studied Group Visit populations. The majority of patients were female (73.9%), white (95.5%), younger than 50 (53.2%), driving long distances to receive care (mean miles = 21, SD 20.4) and had a high school education or less (95.4%). Participants were severely obese (mean BMI = 37.6, SD 28.48) and had 5 co-morbid conditions other than diabetes (mean = 5.5, SD 2.1). Those attending DGMVs had higher baseline A1C, depression scores, BMIs, and more pain than usual care. There was a statistically significant decrease in systolic pressure from time one to time two in patients who attended DGMVs <i>t</i>(52) = 2.18, (p = 0.03). There was no significant impact on outcomes of patients who received usual care. However, it is important to note that the majority of patients attended three or fewer DGMVs visits in one year.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Group visits may not be enough to improve outcomes in this population. Previous studies suggest that improvements are seen in those who attend more frequently. Hence, the lack of improvement in biophysical outcomes may be due to low attendance. The limited impact of this traditional style intervention in relation to low attendance argues the need to test alternative interventions to reach this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":58832,"journal":{"name":"护理学期刊(英文)","volume":"3 3","pages":"314-322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4332852/pdf/nihms-659122.pdf","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"护理学期刊(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojn.2013.33043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of Diabetes Group Medical Visits (DGMVs) verses usual care in a sample of low-income patients with diabetes receiving care at a rural free clinic.

Methods: Data were collected through chart review, using direct data entry into Microsoft Access. Participants were included if they met the inclusion criteria: 1) age ≥ 18 years; 2) diagnosis of diabetes; 3) uninsured and received care between May 2007 and August 2009. Fifty-three participants attended DGMVs and were compared to 58 participants who received usual care.

Results: The personal characteristics and biophysical measures of this population differed from previously studied Group Visit populations. The majority of patients were female (73.9%), white (95.5%), younger than 50 (53.2%), driving long distances to receive care (mean miles = 21, SD 20.4) and had a high school education or less (95.4%). Participants were severely obese (mean BMI = 37.6, SD 28.48) and had 5 co-morbid conditions other than diabetes (mean = 5.5, SD 2.1). Those attending DGMVs had higher baseline A1C, depression scores, BMIs, and more pain than usual care. There was a statistically significant decrease in systolic pressure from time one to time two in patients who attended DGMVs t(52) = 2.18, (p = 0.03). There was no significant impact on outcomes of patients who received usual care. However, it is important to note that the majority of patients attended three or fewer DGMVs visits in one year.

Conclusion: Group visits may not be enough to improve outcomes in this population. Previous studies suggest that improvements are seen in those who attend more frequently. Hence, the lack of improvement in biophysical outcomes may be due to low attendance. The limited impact of this traditional style intervention in relation to low attendance argues the need to test alternative interventions to reach this population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低收入、农村、无保险人群的糖尿病组医疗访问和护理结果。
目的:本研究的目的是在农村免费诊所接受治疗的低收入糖尿病患者样本中测试糖尿病群体医疗访问(dgmv)与常规护理的有效性。方法:采用图表复核的方式收集数据,并使用Microsoft Access直接录入。符合入选标准的受试者被纳入:1)年龄≥18岁;2)糖尿病诊断;3) 2007年5月至2009年8月期间未参保并接受过护理。53名参与者参加了dgmv, 58名参与者接受了常规护理。结果:该人群的个人特征和生物物理指标与先前研究的团体访问人群不同。大多数患者为女性(73.9%),白人(95.5%),年龄小于50岁(53.2%),驾车长途接受护理(平均英里= 21,标准差20.4),高中及以下学历(95.4%)。参与者严重肥胖(平均BMI = 37.6, SD 28.48),除糖尿病外还有5种合并症(平均BMI = 5.5, SD 2.1)。参加dgmv的患者有更高的基线A1C、抑郁评分、bmi和比常规护理更多的疼痛。参加DGMVs的患者第一次和第二次收缩压下降有统计学意义(52)= 2.18,(p = 0.03)。对接受常规护理的患者的预后没有显著影响。然而,值得注意的是,大多数患者在一年内参加了三次或更少的dgmv就诊。结论:小组访问可能不足以改善这一人群的预后。先前的研究表明,那些参加频率更高的人会有所改善。因此,缺乏改善的生物物理结果可能是由于低出勤率。这种传统干预方式对低出勤率的影响有限,因此有必要测试替代干预措施以覆盖这一人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
733
期刊最新文献
Experiences of Early and Enhanced Clinical Exposure for Postgraduate Neonatal Nursing Students at the University of Zambia, School of Nursing Sciences: Lessons and Implications for the Future. 17th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma, Palazzo dei Congressi, Lugano, Switzerland, 13 - 17 June, 2023. Contextualisation of Early and Enhanced Clinical Exposure Model through Development of Curricula for Advanced Practice Nursing and Midwifery. Using Gene Expression Analysis to Examine Changes in Loneliness, Depression and Systemic Inflammation in Lonely Chronically Ill Older Adults. The Feasibility and Acceptability of LISTEN for Loneliness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1