Background: Diabetes care quality has changed little over the past 12 years. To learn what strategies and factors seem most important for improvement, we conducted a mixed method analysis of clinic interviews and characteristics of clinics that are in the high, middle, and low quartiles on a composite measure for diabetes.
Method: We interviewed 31 leaders from 17 primary care clinics selected from the 416 that agreed to participate in a larger observational study of diabetes performance improvement. Semi-structured interviews on barriers and facilitators of diabetes care were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for both comparison among clinics at different levels of performance on the outcome measure. We combined interview data with quantitative data about clinic performance on a standardized composite measure of diabetes outcomes and a survey of the presence of care management processes.
Results: Interview analysis identified 10 themes that provided unique insights into the factors and strategies that were associated with differences in performance level. The main difference among them was the degree to which top performing clinics used patient data to guide proactive and outreach methods to intensify treatment and monitor impact. Top clinics also reported fewer barriers and more facilitators than lower ranked ones, while all recognized key help from the larger organizations of which most were a part.
Conclusions: Top performing clinics’ approach to diabetes care differs from lower performing clinics focusing on proactive care occurring outside of the traditional practice setting. Although confirmatory studies are needed for these preliminary findings, clinical leaders might benefit by considering the value of replicating these differences.
L. Solberg: None. K.A. Peterson: None. H.N. Fu: None. M. Eder: None. R. Jacobsen: None.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R18DK110732)