Evidence for models of diagnostic service provision in the community: literature mapping exercise and focused rapid reviews

Background Current NHS policy favours the expansion of diagnostic testing services in community and primary care settings. Objectives Our objectives were to identify current models of community diagnostic services in the UK and internationally and to assess the evidence for quality, safety and clinical effectiveness of such services. We were also interested in whether or not there is any evidence to support a broader range of diagnostic tests being provided in the community. Review methods We performed an initial broad literature mapping exercise to assess the quantity and nature of the published research evidence. The results were used to inform selection of three areas for investigation in more detail. We chose to perform focused reviews on logistics of diagnostic modalities in primary care (because the relevant issues differ widely between different types of test); diagnostic ultrasound (a key diagnostic technology affected by developments in equipment); and a diagnostic pathway (assessment of breathlessness) typically delivered wholly or partly in primary care/community settings. Databases and other sources searched, and search dates, were decided individually for each review. Quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews and primary studies of any design were eligible for inclusion. Results We identified seven main models of service that are delivered in primary care/community settings and in most cases with the possible involvement of community/primary care staff. Not all of these models are relevant to all types of diagnostic test. Overall, the evidence base for community- and primary care-based diagnostic services was limited, with very few controlled studies comparing different models of service. We found evidence from different settings that these services can reduce referrals to secondary care and allow more patients to be managed in primary care, but the quality of the research was generally poor. Evidence on the quality (including diagnostic accuracy and appropriateness of test ordering) and safety of such services was mixed. Conclusions In the absence of clear evidence of superior clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, the expansion of community-based services appears to be driven by other factors. These include policies to encourage moving services out of hospitals; the promise of reduced waiting times for diagnosis; the availability of a wider range of suitable tests and/or cheaper, more user-friendly equipment; and the ability of commercial providers to bid for NHS contracts. However, service development also faces a number of barriers, including issues related to staffing, training, governance and quality control. Limitations We have not attempted to cover all types of diagnostic technology in equal depth. Time and staff resources constrained our ability to carry out review processes in duplicate. Research in this field is limited by the difficulty of obtaining, from publicly available sources, up-to-date information about what models of service are commissioned, where and from which providers. Future work There is a need for research to compare the outcomes of different service models using robust study designs. Comparisons of ‘true’ community-based services with secondary care-based open-access services and rapid access clinics would be particularly valuable. There are specific needs for economic evaluations and for studies that incorporate effects on the wider health system. There appears to be no easy way of identifying what services are being commissioned from whom and keeping up with local evaluations of new services, suggesting a need to improve the availability of information in this area. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

Smoking cessation in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of more intensive smoking cessation interventions compared to less intensive interventions on smoking cessation in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions was conducted. Electronic searches were carried out on the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO to September 2013. Searches were supplemented by review of trial registries and references from identified trials. Citations and full-text articles were screened by two reviewers. A random-effect Mantel-Haenszel model was used to pool data. SETTING: Primary, secondary and tertiary care. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTIONS: Smoking cessation interventions or medication (more intensive interventions) compared to usual care, counselling or optional medication (less intensive interventions). OUTCOME MEASURES: Biochemically verified smoking cessation was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and effects on glycaemic control. We also carried out a pooled analysis of self-reported smoking cessation outcomes. RESULTS: We screened 1783 citations and reviewed seven articles reporting eight trials in 872 participants. All trials were of 6 months duration. Three trials included pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. The risk ratio of biochemically verified smoking cessation was 1.32 (95% CI 0.23 to 7.43) for the more intensive interventions compared to less intensive interventions with significant heterogeneity (I(2)=76%). Only one trial reported measures of glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: There is an absence of evidence of efficacy for more intensive smoking cessation interventions in people with diabetes. The more intensive strategies tested in trials to date include interventions used in the general population, adding in diabetes-specific education about increased risk. Future research should focus on multicomponent smoking cessation interventions carried out over a period of at least 1 year, and also assess impact on glycaemic control

Smoking cessation in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of more intensive smoking cessation interventions compared to less intensive interventions on smoking cessation in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions was conducted. Electronic searches were carried out on the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO to September 2013. Searches were supplemented by review of trial registries and references from identified trials. Citations and full-text articles were screened by two reviewers. A random-effect Mantel-Haenszel model was used to pool data. SETTING: Primary, secondary and tertiary care. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTIONS: Smoking cessation interventions or medication (more intensive interventions) compared to usual care, counselling or optional medication (less intensive interventions). OUTCOME MEASURES: Biochemically verified smoking cessation was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and effects on glycaemic control. We also carried out a pooled analysis of self-reported smoking cessation outcomes. RESULTS: We screened 1783 citations and reviewed seven articles reporting eight trials in 872 participants. All trials were of 6 months duration. Three trials included pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. The risk ratio of biochemically verified smoking cessation was 1.32 (95% CI 0.23 to 7.43) for the more intensive interventions compared to less intensive interventions with significant heterogeneity (I(2)=76%). Only one trial reported measures of glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: There is an absence of evidence of efficacy for more intensive smoking cessation interventions in people with diabetes. The more intensive strategies tested in trials to date include interventions used in the general population, adding in diabetes-specific education about increased risk. Future research should focus on multicomponent smoking cessation interventions carried out over a period of at least 1 year, and also assess impact on glycaemic control

Predictors of suboptimal glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes patients: The role of medication adherence and body mass index in the relationship between glycaemia and age

Aims: To analyse predictors of glycaemic control including medication adherence and body mass index (BMI) in UK general practice patients with sub-optimally controlled type 2 diabetes. Methods: Baseline demographic, health- and treatment-related measures were evaluated as predictors of one year glycaemic control defined separately as HbA 1c≤7.5% and a continuous measure of HbA 1c concentration, using multivariate regression models. Significant predictors were adjusted for objectively assessed medication adherence and BMI. Results: One-year HbA 1c concentration was associated with baseline HbA 1c (p<0.001), BMI (p=0.02), and inversely associated with age (p=0.007) and objectively assessed adherence. Adherent patients had one-year (adjusted) HbA 1c concentration 0.65% (95% CI -1.04, -0.25; p=0.001) lower than nonadherent. Odds ratios (95% CI) of HbA 1c≤7.5% for 10-year higher age were 1.63 (1.08, 2.45); for adherent compared to non-adherent patients 1.89 (0.84, 4.25); for patients receiving >5 compared to ≤5 medications 0.32 (0.13, 0.76); and for each 1% increment in baseline HbA 1c 0.48 (0.31, 0.73). Conclusions: The lower HbA 1c achieved from greater adherence to glucose lowering treatment is comparable to that achieved with additional medication. Relationships between older age and better glycaemic control are not explained by better adherence, but may partly relate to lower BMI. © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd

Diagnostic accuracy of urine dipstick testing in screening for microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes: a cohort study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend annual screening for microalbuminuria in diabetes. Detection of microalbuminuria is important because it is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Dipstick tests for microalbuminuria may be convenient, but their accuracy is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of urine dipstick testing for microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In a 6-week cohort study in four general practices in Oxfordshire, UK, first-pass urine samples were obtained at two weekly intervals from patients with type 2 diabetes and tested in the practice using Micral-Test and Microalbustix urine dipsticks. Parallel samples were sent for laboratory albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) assay. Results of single dipstick tests and sequences of dipstick and laboratory tests were compared with a clinical testing strategy based on current guidelines to assess the accuracy and estimate costs of testing. RESULTS: The prevalence of microalbuminuria was 12.5% (n = 88). Mean (standard deviation) age was 68 (10) years, 56 (57%) were men. Median (interquartile range) diabetes duration was 6.2 (2.0-10.0) years. The sensitivity and specificity, respectively, of a single Micral-Test were 91.7% and 44.0% and of a Microalbustix test 33.3% and 92.0%. Testing strategies involving dipstick and laboratory ACR measurements or dipstick tests had similar accuracy. The costs of using dipstick tests were overall lower than laboratory ACR-based testing. CONCLUSIONS: Dipstick testing in this study did not reliably identify diabetes patients with microalbuminuria. Although dipstick testing would decrease testing costs, it could either fail to diagnose most patients with microalbuminuria or increase the numbers of patients retested depending on the dipstick used