Short- and long-term effects of a quality improvement collaborative on diabetes management

Introduction: This study examined the short- and long-term effects of a quality improvement collaborative on patient outcomes, professional performance, and structural aspects of chronic care management of type 2 diabetes in an integrated care setting.Methods: Controlled pre- and post-intervention study assessing patient outcomes (hemoglobin A1c, cholesterol, blood pressure, weight, blood lipid levels, and smoking status), professional performance (guideline adherence), and structural aspects of chronic care management from baseline up to 24 months. Analyses were based on 1,861 patients with diabetes in six intervention and nine control regions representing 37 general practices and 13 outpatient clinics.Results: Modest but significant improvement was seen in mean systolic blood pressure (decrease by 4.0 mm Hg versus 1.6 mm Hg) and mean high density lipoprotein levels (increase by 0.12 versus 0.03 points) at two-year follow up. Positive but insignificant differences were found in hemoglobin A1c (0.3%), cholesterol, and blood lipid levels. The intervention group showed significant improvement in the percentage of patients receiving advice and instruction to examine feet, and smaller reductions in the percentage of patients receiving instruction to monitor blood glucose and visiting a dietician annually. Structural aspects of self-management and decision support also improved significantly.Conclusions: At a time of heightened national attention toward diabetes care, our results demonstrate a modest benefit of participation in a multi-institutional quality improvement collaborative focusing on integrated, patient-centered care. The effects persisted for at least 12 months after the intervention was completed.Trial number: http://clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT 00160017

Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: Systematic review

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in improving the quality of care. Data sources: Relevant studies through Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Study selection: Two reviewers independently extracted data on topics, participants, setting, study design, and outcomes. Data synthesis: Of 1104 articles identified, 72 were included in the study. Twelve reports representing nine studies (including two randomised controlled trials) used a controlled design to measure the effects of the quality improvement collaborative intervention on care processes or outcomes of care. Systematic review of these nine studies showed moderate positive results. Seven studies (including one randomised controlled trial) reported an effect on some of the selected outcome measures. Two studies (including one randomised controlled trial) did not show any significant effect. Conclusions: The evidence underlying quality improvement collaboratives is positive but limited and the effects cannot be predicted with great certainty. Considering that quality improvement collaboratives seem to play a key part in current strategies focused on accelerating improvement, but may have only modest effects on outcomes at best, further knowledge of the basic components effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and success factors is crucial to determine the value of quality improvement collaboratives

Off-label Use of Azathioprine in Dermatology A Systematic Review

Objective: To summarize evidence regarding the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of off-label azathioprine use in dermatology. Data Sources: We searched the MEDLINE (1950-2009), EMBASE (1980-2009), and CENTRAL (1996-2009) databases on October 9, 2009. The main search terms were azathioprine and its synonyms. No restrictions were imposed regarding publication date. Only articles in English, French, German, or Dutch were included. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials, cohorts, and case series concerning the use of azathioprine in an off-label dermatologic setting were independently assessed for eligibility by 2 coauthors. The search retrieved 3870 articles, and 148 articles were selected for detailed review. Data Extraction: Forty-three articles matching the inclusion and exclusion criteria were reviewed for methodologic quality by 2 reviewers independently, including an evaluation of components associated with biased estimates of treatment effect. Data Synthesis: High-quality evidence (level A) was found for a moderate therapeutic effect in severe atopic dermatitis. Evidence of moderate quality (level B) was found for efficacy in parthenium dermatitis (an airborne plant allergen contact dermatitis), bullous pemphigoid, chronic actinic dermatitis, and leprosy type 1 reaction. Furthermore, favorable therapeutic effects existed for erythema multiforme, lichen planus, and pityriasis rubra pilaris, although the quality of evidence was low (level C). Conclusions: A strong clinical recommendation was given for azathioprine in atopic dermatitis. Conclusions regarding safety in an off-label setting could not be reached because of scarce and incomplete data (level C evidence). Long-term registries and prospective studies could add to the existing evidence and provide legal support for off-label drug use in dermatology. Arch Dermatol. 2011; 147(4): 474-48