Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30458778›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2018

The impact of integrating medical assistants and community health workers on diabetes care management in community health centers.

Hector P Rodriguez, Mark W Friedberg, Arturo Vargas-Bustamante, Xiao Chen, Ana E Martinez, Dylan H Roby

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2022
    Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hector P RodriguezDivision of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 50 University Hall, Room 245, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA. hrod@berkeley.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6564-2229
Mark W FriedbergRAND Corporation, Boston, MA, USA.
Arturo Vargas-BustamanteDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, California, Los Angeles, USA.
Xiao ChenUCLA Center for Health Policy Research, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, California, Los Angeles, USA.
Ana E MartinezUCLA Center for Health Policy Research, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, California, Los Angeles, USA.
Dylan H RobyDivision of Health Services Management, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.

Funding

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 1R18HS02012001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the impact of implementing team-based diabetes care management involving community health workers (CHWs) vs. medical assistants (MA) in community health centers (CHCs) on diabetes care processes, intermediate outcomes, and patients' experiences of chronic care. DATA SOURCES: Clinical and administrative data (n = 6111) and patient surveys (n = 698) pre-intervention and post-intervention. Surveys (n = 285) and key informant interviews (n = 48) of CHC staff assessed barriers and facilitators of implementation. STUDY

designA three-arm cluster-randomized trial of CHC sites integrating MAs (n = 3) or CHWs (n = 3) for diabetes care management compared control CHC sites (n = 10). Difference-in-difference multivariate regression with exact matching of patients estimated intervention effects. PRINCIPAL

findingsPatients in the CHW intervention arm had improved annual glycated hemoglobin testing (18.5%, p < 0.001), while patients in the MA intervention arm had improved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control (8.4%, p < 0.05) and reported better chronic care experiences over time (β=7.5, p < 0.001). Except for chronic care experiences (p < 0.05) for patients in the MA intervention group, difference-in-difference estimates were not statistically significant because control group patients also improved over time. Some diabetes care processes improved significantly more for control group patients than intervention group patients. Key informant interviews revealed that immediate patient care issues sometimes crowded out diabetes care management activities, especially for MAs.

conclusionsDiabetes care improved in CHCs integrating CHWs and MAs onto primary care teams, but the improvements were no different than improvements observed among matched control group patients. Greater improvement using CHW and MA team-based approaches may be possible if practice leaders minimize use of these personnel to cover shortages that often arise in busy primary care practices.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCluster AnalysisCommunity Health CentersCommunity Health WorkersDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansLeadershipMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care TeamPhysician AssistantsCommunity health centersCommunity health workersDiabetes care managementImplementation researchMedical assistantsPatients’ experiences

Identifiers

PMID30458778
PMCPMC6247511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.