背景:目前的指南建议将2型糖尿病(T2DM)的医师主导治疗(PLC)转变为更有效的多学科医疗保健(MHC)。然而,很少有研究人员研究它在沙特阿拉伯的现实生活中的实施。因此,我们的目的是评估MDC糖尿病管理计划(DMP)的实施情况,并比较综合医院T2DM患者与PLC患者在真实世界实践环境中随访一年后的结局.
方法:我们通过分析两个私人护理中心的所有T2DM患者的医疗记录,进行了这项比较性患者档案回顾研究。比较了两者在实现两个结果方面的有效性:第一年结束时糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)<7%和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-c)<70mg/dl。此外,我们评估了DMP的实施情况.
结果:回顾了八百三十四份医疗记录,537来自DMP,和279来自PLC中心。DMP的个人健康协调几乎完成(97.8%),但在营养方面的实施不完整(65.7%),牙科检查(64.8%),和足部护理(58.3%)。两个护理组的年龄相匹配(p=0.056),性别(p=0.085),糖尿病的持续时间(p=0.217),和基础血糖控制(p=0.171)。DMP显示HbA1c显著净降(-0.5[IQR1.47%]vs-0.2[IQR3.05%],p=0.0001)和LDL-c(-10[IQR50]vs-5[IQR60.5]mg/dl,p=0.004)与PLC相比。在DMP中实现血糖控制的患者比例高于PLC(49.4%vs38.7%,p=0.038)。然而,这两个项目在脂质控制方面表现出相似的结果(28.7%vs.30%,p=0.695)。
结论:尽管在实施方面存在一些差距,与PLC相比,2型糖尿病患者接受DMP治疗1年后的血糖控制更好.两种程序在脂质控制方面具有可比性。进一步的研究发现护理实施方面的差距可以提高可持续性,未来复制,以及类似计划与沙特阿拉伯其他医疗保健系统的普遍性。
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend shifting physician-led care (PLC) for type 2 diabetes mellitus (
T2DM) to more effective multidisciplinary health care (MHC). However, few researchers have studied its real-life implementation in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to assess the implementation and compare the outcomes of an MDC diabetes management program (DMP) among
T2DM patients to a PLC at a general hospital after one year of follow-up in a real-world practice setting.
METHODS: We conducted this comparative patient files review study by analyzing medical records of all
T2DM patients at two private care centers. Both were compared for their effectiveness in achieving two outcomes: the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7% and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) <70 mg/dl at the end of the first year. Additionally, we assessed the implementation of the DMP.
RESULTS: Eight hundred thirty-four medical records were reviewed, 537 from DMP, and 279 from the PLC center. The personal health coordination was almost complete (97.8%) in the DMP, but the implementation was incomplete regarding nutrition (65.7%), dental exam (64.8%), and foot care (58.3%). Both care groups were matched for age (p = 0.056), gender (p = 0.085), duration of diabetes (p = 0.217), and basal glycemic control (p = 0.171). The DMP showed a significant net decrease in HbA1c (-0.5 [IQR 1.47%] vs -0.2 [IQR 3.05%], p = 0.0001) and LDL-c (-10 [IQR 50] vs -5 [IQR 60.5] mg/dl, p = 0.004) compared to PLC. A higher percentage of patients achieved glycemic control in the DMP than in the PLC (49.4% vs 38.7%, p = 0.038). However, both programs demonstrated similar outcomes in lipid control (28.7% vs. 30%, p = 0.695).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite some gaps in implementation, one year of DMP showed better glycemic control among
T2DM patients compared to PLC. Both programs were comparable in terms of lipid control. Further studies identifying the gaps in care implementation could improve sustainability, future replication, and generalizability of similar programs to other healthcare systems in Saudi Arabia.