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
Meta-Analysis
. 1998 Aug 8;317(7155):390-6.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7155.390.

Diabetes care in general practice: meta-analysis of randomised control trials

S Griffin  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diabetes care in general practice: meta-analysis of randomised control trials

S Griffin. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of care in general practice for people with diabetes.

Design: Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing general practice and shared care with follow up in hospital outpatient clinic.

Identification: Trials were identified from searches of eight bibliographic and research databases.

Results: Five trials identified included 1058 people with diabetes, overall mean age 58.4 years, receiving hospital outpatient follow up for their diabetes. Results were heterogeneous between trials. In shared care schemes featuring more intensive support through a computerised prompting system for general practitioners and patients, there was no difference in mortality between care in hospital and care in general practice (odds ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0. 53 to 2.11); glycated haemoglobin tended to be lower in primary care (weighted difference in means of -0.28%, -0.59% to 0.03%); and losses to follow up were significantly lower in primary care (odds ratio 0.37, 0.22 to 0.61). However, schemes with less well developed support for family doctors were associated with adverse outcomes for patients.

Conclusions: Unstructured care in the community is associated with poorer follow up, worse glycaemic control, and greater mortality than in hospital care. Computerised central recall, with prompting for patients and their family doctors, can achieve standards of care as good as or better than hospital outpatient care, at least in the short term. The evidence supports provision of regular prompted recall and review of selected people with diabetes by willing general practitioners. This can be achieved if suitable organisation is in place.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Weighted difference in mean percentage of glycated haemoglobin between general practice and hospital care. Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals
Figure 2
Figure 2
Odds ratios of mortality in general practice and hospital care. Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Wilks JM. Diabetes—a disease for general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1973;23:46–54. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tasker PRW. Is diabetes a disease for general practice? Practical Diabetes. 1984;1:21–24.
    1. Greenhalgh PM. Shared care for diabetes: a systematic review. London: Royal College of General Practitioners; 1994. (Occasional paper 67.) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Starfield B. Primary care. Participants or gatekeepers? Diabetes Care. 1994;17:12–17. - PubMed
    1. Nabarro J. Diabetes and the general practitioner. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1987;37:389. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types