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
. 2012 Sep;18(9):508-14.

Impact of clinical complexity on the quality of diabetes care

LeChauncy D Woodard  1 , Cassie R Landrum, Tracy H Urech, Degang Wang, Salim S Virani, Laura A Petersen
Affiliations

Impact of clinical complexity on the quality of diabetes care

LeChauncy D Woodard et al. Am J Manag Care. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the impact of clinical complexity on 3 dimensions of diabetes care.

Study design: We identified 35,872 diabetic patients receiving care at 7 Veterans Affairs facilities between July 2007 and June 2008 using administrative and clinical data. We examined control at index and appropriate care (among uncontrolled patients) within 90 days, for blood pressure (<130/80 mm Hg), glycated hemoglobin (<7%), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (<100 mg/dL). We used ordered logistic regression to examine the impact of complexity, defined by comorbidities count and illness burden, on control at index and a combined measure of quality (control at index or appropriate follow-up care) for all 3 measures.

Results: There were 6260 (17.5%) patients controlled at index for all 3 quality indicators. Patients with >3 comorbidities (odds ratio [OR], 1.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.67-2.26) and illness burden >2.00 (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13-1.32) were more likely than the least complex patients to be controlled for all 3 measures. Patients with >3 comorbidities (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 2.07-2.54) and illness burden >2.00 (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.33) were also more likely than the least complex patients to meet the combined quality indicator for all 3 measures.

Conclusions: Patients with greatest complexity received higher quality diabetes care compared with less complex patients, regardless of the definition of complexity chosen. Although providers may appropriately target complex patients for aggressive control, deficits in guideline achievement among all diabetic patients highlight the challenges of caring for chronically ill patients and the importance of structuring primary care to promote higher-quality, patient-centered care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors do not have any relevant conflicts of interest to disclose. All authors had access to the data presented in this study and participated in writing the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

No author has potential, perceived, or real conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

    1. Wolff JL, Starfield B, Anderson G. Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(20):2269–2276. - PubMed
    1. Kerr EA, Heisler M, Krein SL, et al. Beyond comorbidity counts: How do comorbidity type and severity influence patients’ treatment priorities and self-management? J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(12):1635–1640. - PMC - PubMed
    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diab Care. 2010;33(1):S11–S61. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beaton SJ, Nag SS, Gunter MJ, Gleeson JM, Sajjan SS, Alexander CM. Adequacy of glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure management for patients with diabetes in a managed care setting. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(3):694–698. - PubMed
    1. Kendall DM, Bergenstral RM. Comprehensive management of patients with type 2 diabetes: establishing priorities of care. Am J Manag Care. 2001;7(suppl):S327–S343. - PubMed

Publication types