4.3 Article

Standardized arrangement for a guideline-driven treatment of the metabolic syndrome: the SAGE-METS study

期刊

CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION
卷 25, 期 4, 页码 971-980

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1185/03007990902810999

关键词

Awareness; Best practice; Metabolic syndrome; Components; Control; Public healthcare; Treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To substantially increase awareness, treatment and effective control of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components. Subjects and methods: This is a pilot best practice implementation enhancement programme to reduce the estimated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in 628 MetS patients with or without diabetes or CVD by improving quality of care. A baseline visit was followed by action to improve adherence to lifestyle advice and drug treatment for CVD risk factors by physicians specifically trained to implement guidelines. Finally, after 6 months, a single-page form was completed, showing if patients were at CVD risk factor target. If not, there was an analysis of the reason why. Results: The programme was effective in improving utilization of evidence-based treatment in 628 MetS patients. There was a substantially greater patient perception of MetS, an enhancement in compliance with lifestyle advice and increased prescription of evidence-based medication, leading to a 48% (p<0.0001) improvement in estimated CVD risk. There was a substantial increase in the number of subjects on target for specific CVD risk factors. Conclusions: This is the first study to increase adherence to multiple interventions for all MetS components on an outpatient basis, in both primary care and teaching hospital settings. Physician and patient education, distribution of printedguidelines and brochures, and completion of a single-page form motivated both physicians and patients to achieve multiple CVD risk factor guideline goals. The absence of a control group is a limitation of this study. Further work is also needed to establish if the improvements observed are sustained on a long-term basis.

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

4.3
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