Collaborative diabetes virtual clinics – a service evaluation and clinical audit
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1179/2057331615Z.0000000004Keywords:
Diabetes virtual clinics, diabetes service models, integrated care, glycaemic control, clinical auditAbstract
AbstractBackground: Diabetes management in primary care is becoming increasingly complex. Integrated working between primary and specialist care teams is important in addressing this complexity. Diabetes virtual clinics (DVC) provide an opportunity for the diabetes specialist team to work collaboratively with the primary care team.
Aim: To evaluate the impact of a DVC on the clinical management and care outcomes of patients in primary care settings.
Methods: A prospective clinical audit of DVC patients was performed in seven general practices comparing data, at baseline and at 6 months. The audit measured changes in care provision and clinical performance. The primary audit standard was that 50% of cases with a baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥58 mmol/mol (7.5%) would optimise HbA1c by a clinical significant reduction of 6 mmol/mol (0.4%).
Results: The audit examined 113 cases that were exposed to the DVC. Data were available on 73 cases at 6 months. The main theme for case discussion was treatment modification and titration (48%, n = 54), followed by: managing co-morbidities (24%, n = 21) and psychosocial factors (14%, n = 12). Primary care was the most common pathway identified, 35% (n = 40) cases avoided being referred to specialist care and 21 (23%) cases were transferred from specialist to primary care. At 6 months, HbA1c reduced by 7 mmol/mol (0.46%) from 73 mmol/mol (8.79%) to 67 mmol/mol (8.32%), p = 0.001. The audit standards were exceeded with 85% of patients achieving an improvement in their glycaemic control and 57% having a reduction in the HbA1c of ≥6 mmol/mol (0.4%).
Conclusions: The DVC resulted in a clinically and statistically significant improvement in HbA1c. It has also meant that more patients can be treated in primary care without the need for referral to specialists. The DVC could be an effective model for integrated working between primary and diabetes specialist services, providing an opportunity for shared learning.
Downloads
References
Health and Social Care Information Centre National Diabetes Audit, Report 1 care processes and treatment targets; 2012 [cited 2012 Feb 28]. Available from: https://catalogue.ic.nhs.uk/publications/clinical/diabetes/nati-diab-audi-10-11/nati-diabaudi-10-11-care-proc-rep-V4.pdf.
Kirkby M. Initiating insulin in patients with type diabetes within primary care. Br J Diabetes Vasc Dis. 2004;4:122.
Millet C, Car J, Eldred D, Khunti K, Mainous A, Majeed A. Diabetes prevalence, process of care, and outcomes in relation to practice size caseload and deprivation: a cross sectional study. J R Soc Med. 2007;100(6):275–83.
Abrahamian H, Schueller A, Mauler H, Prager R, Irsigler K. Transfer of knowledge from specialist to the generalist by video conferencing: an effect on diabetes care. J Telemed Telecare 2002;8:350–5.
Chin M, Drum M, Guillem M, Rimington A, Levie J, Kirchoff A, et al. Improving and sustaining diabetes care in health centres with the health disparities collaborative. Med Care 2007;45(12):1135–43.
Goderis G, Borgermans L, Mathieu C, van den Broeke C, Hannes J, Grol R. Barriers and facilitators to evidenced based care of type 2 diabetes patients: experiences of GPs participating in a quality improvement program. Implement Sci. 2009;4:41.
Harrison R, Clayton W, Wallace, P. Virtual clinic: a telemedicine pilot using a cluster randomised control design. J Telemed Telecare 1999;5:126–30.
Hill J. Virtual clinics: two for the price of one. Diabetes Prim Care Suppl. 2010;12(21):241.
Jacklin P, Roberts J, Wallace P, Haines A, Harrison R, Barber J, et al. Virtual outreach: economic evaluation of joint telecommunications for patients referred by their general practice for specialist opinion. Br Med J. 2003;327.
Mac Farlane A, Harrison R, Murray E, Berlin A, Pallace P. A qualitative study of educational potential of joint tele-consultations at the primary secondary care interface. J Telemed Telecare 2006;12(Suppl.1):22–24.
Manning P, Farrand S, Hendry G. A virtual diabetes clinic: effect on outpatient volumes Department of Endocrinology Dundine New Zealand Department of Health Report. 2010 http://dhbrf.hrc.govt.nz/media/documents_virtual_diabetes_clinic. [accessed 27 Feb 2013].
Majumdar S, Guirguis L, Toth E, Lewanczuk R, Lee T, Johnson J. Controlled trial of a multifaceted intervention for improving quality of care for rural patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003;26(11):3061–6.
Mohiddin A, Naithani S, Robotham D, Ajakaiye O, Costa D, Carey S, et al. Sharing specialist skills for diabetes in an inner city: a comparison of two primary care organisations over 4 years. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12(5):583–90.
Nilsen LL, Moen A. Telecommunication – collaborative work and opportunities for learning across organisational boundaries. J Telemed Telecare 2008;14:377–80.
Smith S, Shah N, Bryant S, Christianson T, Bjorsen S, Gieler P, et al. Chronic care model and shared care in diabetes: a randomised control trial of a electronic decision support system. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(10):1189.
Stanaway S. Virtual clinics: an opportunity for integrated diabetes care. Diabetes Prim Care 2010;12(2):245–50.
Vierhout W, Knottnerus J, van Ooij A, Crebolder H, Pop P, Wesslingh-Megens A. Effectiveness of joint consultation sessions of general practice and orthopaedic surgeons for locomotor system disorder. The Lancet 1995;346:990–4.
Wallace P, Hainees A, Harrison R, Barber J, Thompson S, Jacklin P, et al. (Joint teleconsultations (virtual outreach) versus standard out patient appointment for patients referred for a specialist opinion: a randomised control trial. The Lancet. 2002;39:1961–8.
Wagner E, Austin B, Davis C, Hindmarsh M, Schaefer J, Bonomy A. Improving chronic illness care: translating evidence into action. Health Aff. 2001;20(6):64–78.
Healthcare for London. A diabetes guide for London. NHS, London, 2009.
Diabetes Modernisation Report 2014 http://dmi-diabetes.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DMI-learnings-report.pdf.
Ismail K, Thomas S, Maissi E, Chalder T, Schmidt U, Bartlett J, et al. Motivational enhancement therapy with and without cognitive behavioural therapy to treat type 1 diabetes. A randomised trial. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:708–19.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Essential hypertension: managing adults in primary care. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Centre for Health and Services Research Newcastle; 2004.
Department of Health. Standard general medical services contract. London: Crown Copy Right, 2005a.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. New Engl J Med. 1993;329:683–9.
United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in people with type 2 diabetes. (UKPDS:33) The Lancet 1998;352:837–53.
Diabetes UK Integrated Care for the Person with Diabetes: A report from the Diabetes UK Integrated Care Task and Finish Group; 2010.
Phillips LS, Branch TW, Cook CB, Doyle JP, El-Kebbi IM, Gallina DM, et al. Clinical inertia. Ann Int Med. 2001;135(I 9):825–34.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Foundation of European Nurses in Diabetes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
