4.6 Article

Trends in care practices and outcomes among medicare beneficiaries with diabetes

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
卷 29, 期 5, 页码 396-403

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.08.010

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: While diabetes is a major issue for the aging U.S. population, few studies have described the recent trends in both preventive care practices and complications among the Medicare population with diabetes. Using the Medicare Quality Monitoring System (MQMS), this 2004 study describes these trends from 1992 to 2001 and how these rates vary across demographic subgroups. Methods: Outcomes include age- and gender-adjusted rates of 15 indicators associated with diabetes care from 1992 to 2001, the absolute change in rates from 1992 to 2001, and 2001 rates by demographic subgroups. The data were cross-sectional samples of Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes from 1992 to 2001 from the Medicare 5% Standard Analytic Files. Results: Use of preventive care practices rose from 1992 to 2001: 45 percentage points for HbA1c tests, 51 for lipid tests, 8 for eye exams, and 38 for self-monitoring of glucose levels (all p < 0.05). Rates for short-term and some long-term complications of diabetes (e.g., lower-extremity amputations and cardiovascular conditions) fell from 1992 to 2001 (p < 0.05). However, rates of other long-term complications such as nephropathy, blindness, and retinopathy rose during the period (p < 0.05). Nonwhites and beneficiaries aged < 65 and > 85 exhibited consistently higher complication rates and lower use of preventive services. Conclusions: The Medicare program has seen some significant improvement in preventive care practices and significant declines in lower-limb amputations and cardiovascular conditions. However, rates for other long-term complications have increased, with evidence of subgroup disparities. The MQMS results provide an early warning for policymakers to focus on the diabetes care provided to some vulnerable subgroups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据