Baseline Quality-of-Care Data From a Quality-Improvement Program Implemented by a Network of Diabetes Outpatient Clinics

OBJECTIVE—To describe patterns of diabetes care and implement benchmarking activities at the national level

Four-year impact of a continuous quality improvement effort implemented by a network of diabetes outpatient clinics: the AMD-Annals initiative.

AIMS: We evaluated the impact of a continuous quality improvement effort implemented by a network of Italian diabetes clinics operating in the national healthcare system. METHODS: This was a controlled before-and-after study involving 95 centres, of which 67 joined the initiative since 2004 (group A) and 18 were first involved in 2007 (group B, control). All centres used electronic medical record systems. Information on quality indicators was extracted for the period 2004-2007. Data were centrally analysed anonymously and results were published annually. Each centre's performance was ranked against the 'best performers'. We compared quality indicators between the two groups of centres over 4 years. RESULTS: Over 100 000 Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients were evaluated annually. The proportion of patients with glycated haemoglobin levels < 7% increased by 6% in group A (2007-2004 difference) and by 1.3% in group B. The proportion of patients with low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol < 100 mg/dl improved by over 10% in both groups. The rate of patients with blood pressure values < or = 130/85 mmHg increased in group A (+6.4%), but not in group B (-1.4%). The use of insulin increased in group A only (+5.2%), while the use of statins increased by over 20% in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A physician-led quality improvement effort, based on the systematic evaluation of routine data, is effective in improving the performance of a large number of diabetes clinics. The small percentage increase in the number of patients at target, if applied to large numbers of patients, would translate into a significant impact on public health

Highlights from "Italian Standards of care for Diabetes Mellitus 2009-2010".

The Italian Standards for the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus represent a consensus document of the two Italian scientific diabetes societies (AMD and SID), providing specific recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes and its complications. The level of scientific evidence behind every recommendation has been classified in accordance with the National Guidelines Plan. An original processing system was employed: the document prepared by the Editorial Team was published online for 20 days, and the suggestions and criticisms of about 30 persons were evaluated and integrated to those provided by a panel of diabetologists and members of other healthcare professions dedicated to diabetes care, as well as lay members. Lastly, the document was approved by AMD and SID National Steering Committees. In this version, some highlights of the full document (www.siditalia.it; www.aemmedi.it) concerning the main and most representative recommendations on diagnosis and treatment of diabetes and its complications as well as on diabetes care in some specific contexts, are reported

Highlights from "Italian Standards of care for Diabetes Mellitus 2009-2010"

The Italian Standards for the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus represent a consensus document of the two Italian scientific diabetes societies (AMD and SID), providing specific recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes and its complications. The level of scientific evidence behind every recommendation has been classified in accordance with the National Guidelines Plan. An original processing system was employed: the document prepared by the Editorial Team was published online for 20 days, and the suggestions and criticisms of about 30 persons were evaluated and integrated to those provided by a panel of diabetologists and members of other healthcare professions dedicated to diabetes care, as well as lay members. Lastly, the document was approved by AMD and SID National Steering Committees. In this version, some highlights of the full document (www.siditalia.it; www.aemmedi.it) concerning the main and most representative recommendations on diagnosis and treatment of diabetes and its complications as well as on diabetes care in some specific contexts, are reported

AMD Annals: a model of continuous monitoring and improvement of the quality of diabetes care

OBJECTIVE: in recent years, several initiatives have been launched by the Associazione medici diabetologi (AMD) in the context of a national quality improvement program.These activities include: identification of specific indicators of quality of diabetes care, development of a software to calculate such indicators by using routine clinical data, creation of a network of diabetes clinics and analysis and publication of the results in ad hoc reports (AMD Annals). Through the best performer approach, each centre could compare its own performance not only with the theoretical targets suggested by existing guidelines, but also with the results achieved by the best centres operating within the same healthcare system.We evaluated whether the involvement of diabetes clinics into the AMD Annals initiative improved the quality of care over 4 years. DESIGN: a controlled before and after study was performed to compare data collected from 2004 to 2007 by two groups of centres: group A included centres that had been involved in the project since the first edition of AMD Annals; group B included centres only involved in the last edition. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: overall, 124 diabetes clinics provided data on over 100,000 type 2 diabetes patients/year seen from 2004 to 2007. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: process indicators included the proportion of patients with at least one measurement of HbA1c, blood pressure and lipid profile during the previous 12 months. Intermediate outcomes included percentages of patients with levels of HbA1c ≤ 7%, blood pressure ≤ 130/85 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dl (favourable indicators), and the percentages of patients with levels of HbA1c ≥ 9%, blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl (unfavourable indicators). Percentages of patients treated with insulin, two or more antihypertensive agents, and statins were also evaluated. A multilevel analysis adjusted for age, gender, diabetes duration, and clustering effect was applied to investigate the changes in the indicators between the two groups of centres during 4 years. RESULTS: lipid profile monitoring increased more in group A (+6.2% from 2004 to 2007) than in group B (+2.4%), while HbA1c and blood pressure monitoring did not change over time in both groups. As for the outcomes considered, the percentage of patients with HbA1c ≤ 7% increased by 6% in group A and by 1.3%in group B, while the proportion of patients achieving the blood pressure target increased in group A (+6.4%), but not in group B (-1.4%). A reduction in the percentage of patients with blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg was found in group A (-7.3%) but not in group B (-0.9%). Marked improvements in the proportion of patients with LDL-cholesterol at target were documented in both groups (group A: +10.5%; group B: +12.2%.) The proportion of patients treated with insulin increased in group A only (+5.8%), while the use of statins grew by 20%in both groups.The proportion of individuals treated with two or more antihypertensive drugs increased by 3.6% in group A and by 1.6% in group B. CONCLUSION: the AMD Annals approach can be considered as a case model for quality improvement activities in chronic diseases and a tool to evaluate the level of adoption/acceptance of guidelines in clinical practice. The considerable success documented was obtained without allocation of extra resources or financial incentives but simply through a physician-led effort made possible by the commitment of the specialists involved

[AMD Annals: a model of continuous monitoring and improvement of the quality of diabetes care].

OBJECTIVE: in recent years, several initiatives have been launched by the Associazione medici diabetologi (AMD) in the context of a national quality improvement program.These activities include: identification of specific indicators of quality of diabetes care, development of a software to calculate such indicators by using routine clinical data, creation of a network of diabetes clinics and analysis and publication of the results in ad hoc reports (AMD Annals). Through the best performer approach, each centre could compare its own performance not only with the theoretical targets suggested by existing guidelines, but also with the results achieved by the best centres operating within the same healthcare system.We evaluated whether the involvement of diabetes clinics into the AMD Annals initiative improved the quality of care over 4 years. DESIGN: a controlled before and after study was performed to compare data collected from 2004 to 2007 by two groups of centres: group A included centres that had been involved in the project since the first edition of AMD Annals; group B included centres only involved in the last edition. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: overall, 124 diabetes clinics provided data on over 100,000 type 2 diabetes patients/year seen from 2004 to 2007. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: process indicators included the proportion of patients with at least one measurement of HbA1c, blood pressure and lipid profile during the previous 12 months. Intermediate outcomes included percentages of patients with levels of HbA1c ≤ 7%, blood pressure ≤ 130/85 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dl (favourable indicators), and the percentages of patients with levels of HbA1c ≥ 9%, blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl (unfavourable indicators). Percentages of patients treated with insulin, two or more antihypertensive agents, and statins were also evaluated. A multilevel analysis adjusted for age, gender, diabetes duration, and clustering effect was applied to investigate the changes in the indicators between the two groups of centres during 4 years. RESULTS: lipid profile monitoring increased more in group A (+6.2% from 2004 to 2007) than in group B (+2.4%), while HbA1c and blood pressure monitoring did not change over time in both groups. As for the outcomes considered, the percentage of patients with HbA1c ≤ 7% increased by 6% in group A and by 1.3%in group B, while the proportion of patients achieving the blood pressure target increased in group A (+6.4%), but not in group B (-1.4%). A reduction in the percentage of patients with blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg was found in group A (-7.3%) but not in group B (-0.9%). Marked improvements in the proportion of patients with LDL-cholesterol at target were documented in both groups (group A: +10.5%; group B: +12.2%.) The proportion of patients treated with insulin increased in group A only (+5.8%), while the use of statins grew by 20%in both groups.The proportion of individuals treated with two or more antihypertensive drugs increased by 3.6% in group A and by 1.6% in group B. CONCLUSION: the AMD Annals approach can be considered as a case model for quality improvement activities in chronic diseases and a tool to evaluate the level of adoption/acceptance of guidelines in clinical practice. The considerable success documented was obtained without allocation of extra resources or financial incentives but simply through a physician-led effort made possible by the commitment of the specialists involved