Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Dec;23(6):682-9.
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr053. Epub 2011 Aug 10.

A web-based diabetes intervention for physician: a cluster-randomized effectiveness trial

Carlos A Estrada  1 , Monika M Safford, Amanda H Salanitro, Thomas K Houston, William Curry, Jessica H Williams, Fernando Ovalle, Yongin Kim, Pamela Foster, Jeroan J Allison
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A web-based diabetes intervention for physician: a cluster-randomized effectiveness trial

Carlos A Estrada et al. Int J Qual Health Care. 2011 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a provider-based education and implementation intervention for improving diabetes control.

Design: Cluster-randomized trial with baseline and follow-up cross sections of diabetes patients in each participating physician's practice.

Setting: Eleven US Southeastern states, 2006-08.

Participants: Two hundred and five rural primary care physicians.

Intervention: Multi-component interactive intervention including Web-based continuing medical education, performance feedback and quality improvement tools. Primary Outcome Measures 'Acceptable control' [hemoglobin A1c ≤9%, blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mmHg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) <130 mg/dl] and 'optimal control' (A1c <7%, BP <130/80 mmHg, LDL <100 mg/dl).

Results: Of 364 physicians attempting to register, 205 were randomized to the intervention (n= 102) or control arms (n= 103). Baseline and follow-up data were provided by 95 physicians (2127 patients). The proportion of patients with A1c ≤9% was similar at baseline and follow-up in both the control [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61, 1.47] and intervention arms [AOR: 1.16 (95% CI: 0.80, 1.69)]; BP <140/90 mmHg and LDL <130 mg/dl were also similar at both measurement points (P= 0.66, P= 0.46; respectively). We observed no significant effect on diabetes control attributable to the intervention for any of the primary outcome measures. Intervention physicians engaged with the Website over a median of 64.7 weeks [interquartile range (IQR): 45.4-81.8) for a median total of 37 min (IQR: 16-66).

Conclusions: A wide-reach, low-intensity, Web-based interactive multi-component intervention did not improve control of glucose, BP or lipids for patients with diabetes of physicians practicing in the rural Southeastern US.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Main outcomes (top, middle panels). Proportions of patients with acceptable and optimal hemoglobin A1c, BP (BP, mmHg) and cholesterol (LDL, mg/dl) control for intervention (n= 48) or control (n= 47) physicians, at baseline (pre, n= 1182 patients) and follow-up (post, n= 945 patients). Secondary outcomes (bottom panel). Proportion assessed of hemoglobin A1c (past year), BP (last visit) and LDL (past 2 years). *P < 0.001, **P= 0.05.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Secondary outcomes. Hemoglobin A1c, systolic and diastolic BP (mmHg) and cholesterol (LDL, mg/dl) for patients in the control and intervention groups at baseline (pre) and follow-up (post) (values are means and 95% confidence intervals).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Fact Sheet: General Information and National Estimates on Diabetes in the United States, 2007. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2008.
    1. Mann DM, Woodward M, Ye F, et al. Trends in medication use among US adults with diabetes mellitus: glycemic control at the expense of controlling cardiovascular risk factors. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:1718–20. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.296. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jencks SF, Cuerdon T, Burwen DR, et al. Quality of medical care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: a profile at state and national levels. JAMA. 2000;284:1670–6. doi:10.1001/jama.284.13.1670. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weingarten JP, Jr, Brittman S, Hu W, et al. The state of diabetes care provided to Medicare beneficiaries living in rural America. J Rural Health. 2006;22:351–8. doi:10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00057.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Andrus MR, Kelley KW, Murphey LM, et al. A comparison of diabetes care in rural and urban medical clinics in Alabama. J Community Health. 2004;29:29–44. doi:10.1023/B:JOHE.0000007443.96138.03. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types