4.6 Article

Relation Between the Level of American Indian and Alaska Native Diabetes Education Program Services and Quality-of-Care Indicators

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 98, Issue 11, Pages 2079-2084

Publisher

AMER PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.110478

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [P01 LIS 10854]
  2. National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities [P60 MD000507]
  3. National Institute on Aging [P30 AG1 5297]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. We examined the relation between the level of diabetes education program services in the Indian Health Service (IHS) and indicators of the quality of diabetes care to determine if more-comprehensive diabetes services were associated with better quality of diabetes care. Methods. In this cross-sectional study, we used the IHS Integrated Diabetes Education Recognition Program to rank program services into 1 of 3 levels of comprehensiveness, ranging from lowest (developmental) to highest (integrated). We compared quality-of-care indicators among programs of differing levels with the 2001 IHS Diabetes Care and Outcomes Audit. Quality indicators included patients having recommended yearly examinations, education, and laboratory tests and achieving recommended levels of intermediate outcomes of care. Results. Most of the 86 participating programs were classified at or below the developmental level; only 9 programs (11%) were ranked at higher levels. After adjusting for patient characteristics, program factors, and correlation of patients within programs, we associated programs that were more comprehensive with higher completion rates of yearly lipid and hemoglobin A1C tests (P <.05). Conclusions. System-wide improvements in diabetes education are associated with better diabetes care. The results can help inform the development of diabetes education programs. (Am J Public Health. 2008;98:2079-2084. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.110478)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available