11 research outputs found

    Structured chronic primary care and health-related quality of life in chronic heart failure

    Get PDF
    Background: Structured care is proposed as a lever for improving care for patients with chronic conditions. The purpose of this study was to explore the associations of structured care characteristics, derived from the Chronic Care Model, with health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and optimal clinical management in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients in primary care, as well as the association between optimal management and HRQOL. Methods: Cross-sectional observational study using multi-level random-coefficient analyses of a representative sample of 357 patients diagnosed with CHF from 42 primary care practices in the Netherlands. We combined individual medical record data with patient and physician questionnaires. Results: There was large variation in the levels and presence of structured care elements. A 91% of physicians indicated that next appointments for CHF patients were made immediately after visits, while 11% indicated that reminders on CHF management were periodically received in their practice. Few associations were found between the organizational characteristics and optimal treatment or HRQOL. Optimal pharmacological treatment related to better quality of life (β = -11.5, P < .0001). Also, more lifestyle advice was given in practices with an appointment system allowing contact with more than one professional during the encounter (β = 1.0, P = .04). Conclusion: HRQOL and treatment quality in CHF patients were not consistently associated with characteristics of structured care in primary care practices

    Structured diabetes care leads to differences in organization of care in general practices: the healthcare professional and patient perspective

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Care for patients with chronic diseases is challenging and requires multifaceted interventions to appropriately coordinate the entire treatment process. The effect of such interventions on clinical outcomes has been assessed, but evidence of the effect on organization of care is scarce.The aim is to assess the effect of structured diabetes care on organization of care from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals in routine practice, and to ascertain whether this effect persists METHODS: In a quasi-experimental study the effect of structured care (SC) was compared with care-as-usual (CAU). Questionnaires were sent to healthcare professionals (SC n = 31; CAU n = 11) and to patients (SC n = 301; CAU n = 102). A follow-up questionnaire was sent after formal support of the intervention ended (2007). RESULTS: SC does have an effect on the organization of care. More cooperation between healthcare professionals, less referrals to secondary care and more education were reported in the SC group as compared to the CAU group. These changes were found both at the healthcare professional and at the patient level. Organizational changes remained after formal support for the intervention support had ended. CONCLUSION: According to patients and healthcare professionals, structured care does have a positive effect on the organization of care. The use of these two sources of information is important, not only to assess the value of changes in care for the patient and the healthcare provider but also to ascertain the validity of the results found

    Diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetes mellitus: risk factors and prevention

    No full text
    A nefropatia diabética (ND) é responsável pelo aumento do número de pacientes em diálise em países em desenvolvimento, e já é a principal causa de terapia de substituição renal nos países desenvolvidos. Neste manuscrito, revisamos os fatores de risco e apontamos estratégias para prevenir esta complicação microvascular nos pacientes com diabete melito tipo 2 (DM2). Alguns fatores de risco genéticos e não-genéticos estão relacionados ao desenvolvimento e à progressão da ND em pacientes DM2. Genes candidatos têm sido analisados, mas ainda há controvérsias sobre os marcadores genéticos da doença. Os fatores de risco não-genéticos reconhecidos são o mau controle glicêmico, pressórico e lipídico. Além disso, tem sido sugerido que a presença de retinopatia diabética e de neuropatia autonômica, do hábito de fumar, da alta ingestão protéica, e de níveis mais altos de albuminúria (mesmo dentro dos níveis normais) estão associados com um risco aumentado de desenvolvimento de ND. Algumas estratégias têm sido investigadas e comprovadas para prevenir ou, no mínimo, postergar o desenvolvimento da ND, tais como o controle da pressão arterial, da glicemia e da dislipidemia. Adicionalmente, os inibidores da ECA e os bloqueadores da angiotensina II apresentam efeitos independentes, não apenas explicado pelo controle da pressão arterial. Outras medidas terapêuticas são a baixa ingestão de proteínas na dieta e a suspensão do fumo.Diabetic nephropathy (DN) is responsible for the increasing number of patients on dialysis in developing countries, and is already the most common cause of renal replacement therapy in the developed ones. In this manuscript, we review the risk factors and point out strategies to prevent this microvascular complication in type 2 diabetic patients (DM2). There are some known genetic and non-genetic risk factors related to the development and progression of DN in DM2 patients. Candidate genes have been analysed, but there are still controversy about the genetic markers of the disease. Recognized non-genetic risk factors are poor glycemic, pressoric and lipidic control. Additionally, it has been suggested that the presence of diabetic retinopathy, autonomic neuropathy, smoking habit, higher protein ingestion, and higher normal levels of albuminuria (even within the normal range) are associated with an increased risk of developing DN. Some strategies have been investigated and proved to prevent or at least to postpone DN, such as to control blood pressure, glycemic levels and dyslipidemia. Furthermore, angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-II blockers have independent effects, not explained by blood pressure control alone. Other therapeutic items are to consume a low protein diet and to quit smoking
    corecore