Observational studyOntario health technology assessment series2014
Evaluation of a chronic disease management system for the treatment and management of diabetes in primary health care practices in Ontario: an observational study.
Observational study in Ontario health technology assessment series, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design, effectiveness, and economic outcomes of contemporary chronic disease clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Pooled it
- Healthcare dashboard technologies and data visualization for lipid management: A scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Barriers and enablers to implementing and using clinical decision support systems for chronic diseases: a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation.Implementation science communications · 2022Review
- Experiences of People with Diabetes by Payer Type: An Analysis of the Roper Diabetes Data Set.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputerized chronic disease management systems (CDMSs), when aligned with clinical practice guidelines, have the potential to effectively impact diabetes care.
objectiveThe objective was to measure the difference between optimal diabetes care and actual diabetes care before and after the introduction of a computerized CDMS.
methodsThis 1-year, prospective, observational, pre/post study evaluated the use of a CDMS with a diabetes patient registry and tracker in family practices using patient enrolment models. Aggregate practice-level data from all rostered diabetes patients were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was the change in proportion of patients with up-to-date "ABC" monitoring frequency (i.e., hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure, and cholesterol). Changes in the frequency of other practice care and treatment elements (e.g., retinopathy screening) were also determined. Usability and satisfaction with the CDMS were measured.
resultsNine sites, 38 health care providers, and 2,320 diabetes patients were included. The proportion of patients with up-to-date ABC (12%), hemoglobin A1c (45%), and cholesterol (38%) monitoring did not change over the duration of the study. The proportion of patients with up-to-date blood pressure monitoring improved, from 16% to 20%. Data on foot examinations, retinopathy screening, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers, and documentation of self-management goals were not available or not up to date at baseline for 98% of patients. By the end of the study, attitudes of health care providers were more negative on the Training, Usefulness, Daily Practice, and Support from the Service Provider domains of the CDMS, but more positive on the Learning, Using, Practice Planning, CDMS, and Satisfaction domains. LIMITATIONS: Few practitioners used the CDMS, so it was difficult to draw conclusions about its efficacy. Simply giving health care providers a potentially useful technology will not ensure its use.
conclusionsThis real-world evaluation of a web-based CDMS for diabetes failed to impact physician practice due to limited use of the system. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patients and health care providers need timely access to information to ensure proper diabetes care. This study looked at whether a computer-based system at the doctor's office could improve diabetes management. However, few clinics and health care providers used the system, so no improvement in diabetes care was seen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24748911PMC3991329W321069027What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.