Abstract
BACKGROUND: In New Zealand, more than 5% of people aged 50 years and older have undiagnosed diabetes; most of them attend family practitioners (FPs) at least once a year.
OBJECTIVES: To test the effectiveness of patients or computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in patients attending FPs.
DESIGN: A randomized-controlled trial compared screening rates in 4 intervention arms: patient reminders, computer reminders, both reminders, and usual care. The trial lasted 2 months. The patient reminder was a diabetes risk self-assessment sheet filled in by patients and given to the FP during the consultation. The computer reminder was an icon that flashed only for patients considered eligible for screening.
PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seven FPs.
MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was whether each eligible patient, who attended during the trial, was or was not tested for blood glucose. Analysis was by intention to treat and allowed for clustering by FP.
RESULTS: Patient reminders (odds ratio [OR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21, 2.43), computer reminders (OR 2.55, 1.68, 3.88), and both reminders (OR 1.69, 1.11, 2.59) were all effective compared with usual care. Computer reminders were more effective than patient reminders (OR 1.49, 1.07, 2.07). Patients were more likely to be screened if they visited the FP repeatedly, if patients were non-European, if they were “regular” patients of the practice, and if their FP had a higher screening rate prior to the study.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient and computer reminders were effective methods to increase screening for diabetes. However, the effects were not additive.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kenealy T, Braatvedt G, Scragg R. Screening for type 2 diabetes in nonpregnant adults in New Zealand: practical recommendations. N Z Med J. 2002;115:194–6.
Ministry of Health. Taking the Pulse: The 1996/97 New Zealand Health Survey. Wellington: Ministry of Health; 1999.
Johnston M, Langton K, Haynes B, Mathieu A. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome; a critical appraisal of research. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:135–42.
Shea A, DuMouchel W, Bahamonde L. A meta-analysis of 16 randomised controlled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventive care in the ambulatory setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:399–409.
Larme A, Pugh J. Attitudes of primary care providers toward diabetes: barriers to guideline implementation. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:1391–6.
Nutting P, Rost K, Dickinson M, et al. Barriers to initiating depression treatment in primary care practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:103–11.
Maly R, Abrahamse A, Hirsch S, et al. What influences physician practice behaviour? An interview study of physicians who received consultative geriatric assessment recommendations. Arch Fam Med. 1996;5:448–54.
Cockburn J, Pit S. Prescribing behaviour in clinical practice: patients’ expectations and doctors’ perceptions of patients’ expectations—a questionnaire study. BMJ. 1997;315:520–3.
Turner B, Day S, Borenstein B. A controlled trial to improve delivery of preventive care: physician or patient reminders? J Gen Intern Med. 1989;4:403–9.
Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware J, et al. Patients’ participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3:448–57.
Yabroff K, Mandelblatt J. Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1998;8:749–57.
Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Tremmel J, Welch H. Direct-to-consumer advertisements for prescription drugs: what are Americans being sold? Lancet. 2001;358:1141–6.
Hoffman J, Wilkes M. Direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs (editorial). BMJ. 1999;318:1301–2.
Streja D, Rabkin S. Factors associated with implementation of preventive care measures in patients with diabetes mellitus. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:294–302.
Osborn E, Bird J, McPhee S, et al. Cancer screening by primary care physicians. Can we explain the differences? J Fam Pract. 1991;32:465–71.
Cabana M, Rand C, Powe N, et al. Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? JAMA. 1999;282:1458–65.
Kenealy T, Arroll B, Kenealy H, et al. General practice changes in south Auckland from 1990 to 1999: a threat to continuity of care? N Z Fam Phys. 2002;29:387–90.
Health Funding Authority. Diabetes 2000. Wellington: Health Funding Authority; 2000.
Herman W, Smith P, Thompson T, et al. A new and simple questionnaire to identify people at increased risk for undiagnosed diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1995;18:382–7.
American Diabetes Association. Screening for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(suppl 1):S20–3.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare for this article or this research.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kenealy, T., Arroll, B. & Petrie, K.J. Patients and computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in family practice. J GEN INTERN MED 20, 916–921 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0197.x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0197.x