Home monitoring of glucose and blood pressure

Home monitoring of blood glucose and blood pressure levels can provide patients and physicians with valuable information in the management of diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Home monitoring allows patients to play an active role in their care and may improve treatment adherence and clinical outcomes. Glucose meters currently on the market produce results within 15 percent of serum blood glucose readings and offer a variety of features. Although the data are somewhat conflicting, home glucose monitoring has been associated with improved glycemic control and reduced long-term complications from diabetes. These effects are more pronounced in patients who take insulin. Home blood pressure values predict target organ damage and cardiovascular outcomes better than values obtained in the office. Home blood pressure measurements are also effective at detecting borderline hypertension and monitoring the effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs. Validated arm cuffs are the preferred blood pressure devices for home use. Information from home monitoring should always be used in conjunction with that from regular office visits and other data to make appropriate therapeutic decisions.     

Clinical outcomes for low-income adults with hypertension and diabetes

BACKGROUND: Long-term management of hypertension and diabetes, which are more prevalent in minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, presents challenges for healthcare providers in community health centers. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was twofold: to examine health outcomes for persons with hypertension and diabetes and to compare these outcomes for disparities in patients who were Black, Hispanic, or White. METHODS: Medical records (N = 280) from an urban community health center that serves predominantly uninsured adults were reviewed for selected clinical outcomes of primary care. Measures included outcomes of hypertension and diabetes control, lifestyle behaviors, preventive care, and patient status. Chi-square tests, t tests, and one-way analysis of covariance were used to analyze racial/ethnic group differences. RESULTS: Data revealed significant differences in smoking status, influenza immunization, and blood pressure. Racial/ethnic group differences were minimal compared with the overall high prevalence of risk factors such as smoking and obesity. Regular access to primary care did not result in improved clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The findings support the need for more effective interventions that promote healthy lifestyle if health disparities in low-income populations with chronic conditions are to be reduced.     

Blood pressure checks and diagnosing hypertension (BP-CHECK): Design and methods of a randomized controlled diagnostic study comparing clinic,home, kiosk,and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring

BackgroundThe US Preventive Services Task Force recommends out-of-office blood pressure (BPs) before making a new diagnosis of hypertension, using 24-h ambulatory (ABPM) or home BP monitoring (HBPM), however this is not common in routine clinical practice. Blood Pressure Checks and Diagnosing Hypertension (BP-CHECK) is a randomized controlled diagnostic study assessing the comparability and acceptability of clinic, home, and kiosk-based BP monitoring to ABPM for diagnosing hypertension. Stakeholders including patients, providers, policy makers, and researchers informed the study design and protocols.MethodsAdults aged 18–85 without diagnosed hypertension and on no hypertension medication with elevated BPs in clinic and at the baseline research visit are randomized to one of 3 regimens for diagnosing hypertension: (1) clinic BPs, (2) home BPs, or (3) kiosk BPs; all participants subsequently complete ABPM. The primary outcomes are the comparability (with daytime ABPM mean systolic and diastolic BP as the reference standard) and acceptability (e.g., adherence to, patient-reported outcomes) of each method compared to ABPM. Longer-term outcomes are assessed at 6-months including: patient-reported outcomes, primary care providers' diagnosis of hypertension; and BP control. We report challenges experienced and our response to these.ResultsEnrollment began in May of 2017 with a target of randomizing 510 participants. BP thresholds for diagnosing hypertension in the US changed after the trial started. We discuss the stakeholder process used to assess and respond to these changes.Conclusion and public health impactBP-CHECK will inform which hypertension diagnostic methods are most accurate, acceptable, and feasible to implement in primary care.     

Leveraging advances in diabetes technologies in primary care: a narrative review

Primary care providers (PCPs) play an important role in providing medical care for patients with type 2 diabetes. Advancements in diabetes technologies can assist PCPs in providing personalised care that addresses each patient’s individual needs. Diabetes technologies fall into two major categories: devices for glycaemic self-monitoring and insulin delivery systems. Monitoring technologies encompass self-measured blood glucose (SMBG), where blood glucose is intermittently measured by a finger prick blood sample, and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, which use an interstitial sensor and are capable of giving real-time information. Studies show people using real-time CGM have better glucose control compared to SMBG. CGM allows for new parameters including time in range (the time spent within the desired target glucose range), which is an increasingly relevant real-time metric of glycaemic control. Insulin pens have increased the ease of administration of insulin and connected pens that can calculate and capture data on dosing are becoming available. There are a number of websites, software programs, and applications that can help PCPs and patients to integrate diabetes technology into their diabetes management schedules. In this article, we summarise these technologies and provide practical information to inform PCPs about utility in their clinical practice. The guiding principle is that use of technology should be individualised based on a patient’s needs, desires, and availability of devices. Diabetes technology can help patients improve their clinical outcomes and achieve the quality of life they desire by decreasing disease burden.

KEY MESSAGES

• It is important to understand the role that diabetes technologies can play in primary care to help deliver high-quality care, taking into account patient and community resources. Diabetes technologies fall into two major categories: devices for glycaemic self-monitoring and insulin delivery systems. Modern self-measured blood glucose devices are simple to use and can help guide decision making for self-management plans to improve clinical outcomes, but cannot provide “live” data and may under- or overestimate blood glucose; patients’ monitoring technique and compliance should be reviewed regularly. Importantly, before a patient is provided with monitoring technology, they must receive suitably structured education in its use and interpretation.
• Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is now standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes and people with type 2 diabetes on meal-time (prandial) insulin. Real-time CGM can tell both the patient and the healthcare provider when glucose is in the normal range, and when they are experiencing hyper- or hypoglycaemia. Using CGM data, changes in lifestyle, eating habits, and medications, including insulin, can help the patient to stay in a normal glycaemic range (70–180 mg/dL). Real-time CGM allows for creation of an ambulatory glucose profile and monitoring of time in range (the time spent within target blood glucose of 70–180 mg/dL), which ideally should be at least 70%; avoiding time above range (>180 mg/dL) is associated with reduced diabetes complications and avoiding time below range (<70 mg/dL) will prevent hypoglycaemia. Insulin pens are simpler to use than syringes, and connected pens capture information on insulin dose and injection timing.
• There are a number of websites, software programs and applications that can help primary care providers and patients to integrate diabetes technology into their diabetes management schedules. The guiding principle is that use of technology should be individualised based on a patient’s needs, desires, skill level, and availability of devices.

     

Nurse practitioner-led multidisciplinary teams to improve chronic illness care: The unique strengths of nurse practitioners applied to shared medical appointments/group visits

Purpose: To describe the roles of nurse practitioners (NPs) in a novel model of healthcare delivery for patients with chronic disease: shared medical appointments (SMAs)/group visits based on the chronic care model (CCM). To map the specific skills of NPs to the six elements of the CCM: self-management, decision support, delivery system design, clinical information systems, community resources, and organizational support.
Data sources: Case studies of three disease-specific multidisciplinary SMAs (diabetes, heart failure, and hypertension) in which NPs played a leadership role.
Conclusions: NPs have multiple roles in development, implementation, and sustainability of SMAs as quality improvement interventions. Although the specific skills of NPs map out all six elements of the CCM, in our context, they had the greatest role in self-management, decision support, and delivery system design.
Implications for practice: With the increasing numbers of patients with chronic illnesses, healthcare systems are increasingly challenged to provide necessary care and empower patients to participate in that care. NPs can play a key role in helping to meet these challenges.     

Computerized knowledge management in diabetes care

INTRODUCTION: Many scientific achievements become part of usual diabetes care only after long delays. The purpose of this article is to identify the impact of automated information interventions on diabetes care and patient outcomes and to enable this knowledge to be incorporated into diabetes care practice. METHODS: We conducted systematic electronic and manual searches and identified reports of randomized clinical trials of computer-assisted interventions in diabetes care. Studies were grouped into 3 categories: computerized prompting of diabetes care, utilization of home glucose records in computer-assisted insulin dose adjustment, and computer-assisted diabetes patient education. RESULTS: Among 40 eligible studies, glycated hemoglobin and blood glucose levels were significantly improved in 7 and 6 trials, respectively. Significantly improved guideline compliance was reported in 6 of 8 computerized prompting studies. Three of 4 pocket-sized insulin dosage computers reduced hypoglycemic events and insulin doses. Metaanalysis of studies using home glucose records in insulin dose adjustment documented a mean decrease in glycated hemoglobin of.14 mmol/L (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.16) and a decrease in blood glucose of.33 mmol/L (95% CI, 0.28-0.39). Several computerized educational programs improved diet and metabolic indicators. DISCUSSION: Computerized knowledge management is becoming a vital component of quality diabetes care. Prompting follow-up procedures, computerized insulin therapy adjustment using home glucose records, remote feedback, and counseling have documented benefits in improving diabetes-related outcomes.     

Monitoring glycemic control: the cornerstone of diabetes care

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and escalating costs, and its prevalence is increasing to epidemic proportions. Studies have consistently documented the importance of glycemic control in delaying the onset and decreasing the incidence of both the short- and long-term complications of diabetes. Although glycemic control is difficult to achieve and challenging to maintain, its impact on disease outcomes is well worth the effort. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the importance of monitoring and tightly controlling blood glucose concentrations in patients with diabetes and the methods and tools available for achieving these goals. METHODS: This clinical review was developed using 102 a MEDLINE search of the literature from 1990 to 2005 using the terms diabetes, glucose control, glucose monitoring, A(1c), and hypoglycemia. RESULTS: The complications of diabetes can be prevented or sharply curtailed through tight glycemic control, which requires frequent monitoring of blood glucose levels, careful attention to diet and exercise, and the use of medications. The progressive nature of diabetes imposes the need for frequent and regular monitoring, leading to data-driven adjustments to therapy to maintain optimal glucose levels. Failure to achieve glycemic control is often the result of a failure to educate the patient about how to monitor blood glucose levels and the importance of accuracy in doing so. CONCLUSIONS: Tight glycemic control requires an 102 educated and motivated patient, an appropriate treatment regimen, vigilant monitoring, and a close partnership between the patient and a multidisciplinary team of health care professionals to ensure accurate monitoring and appropriate actions. The growing array of monitoring devices contributes to this effort by providing increased convenience and accuracy.     

Alliance not compliance: coaching strategies to improve type 2 diabetes outcomes

PURPOSE: To explore strategies for improving patient outcomes in type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCES: The literature related to type 2 diabetes management, behavior change, communication, diabetes self-management, and coaching. CONCLUSIONS: The strategies currently suggested for improving patient outcomes, e.g., increasing provider adherence to evidence-based management guidelines, streamlining practice systems, and promoting patient lifestyle changes through intensive education, have produced mixed outcomes. Of the many complexities involved in managing type 2 diabetes, motivating patients to change behavior may be the most challenging. A suggestion for improving patient self-management of type 2 diabetes is to use coaching communication within a framework of behavior change in the context of the primary care encounter between nurse practitioners (NPs) and their patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Given the varied outcomes of current strategies, coaching by NPs may provide a feasible alternative for improving patient outcomes in type 2 diabetes. Coaching communication can be implemented during office visits as an intervention without cost. To effectively implement this approach, however, practicing NPs and NP students need more formal education in this expected but underdeveloped NP role competency. NPs are called upon to contribute to the body of knowledge needed to validate the merits of coaching for their patients.     

Advancing Oncology Nursing Practice Through the Adoption of Patient Monitoring Digital Tools

ObjectiveThe objective of this paper is to describe the use of oncology digital symptom monitoring and patient self-management coaching tools, how nurses and nurse practitioners (NPs) can optimize their use as an adjunct in improving oncology care and discuss issues and strategies needed for adoption within a variety of clinical settings.Data SourcesA review of the research literature regarding digital health in oncology symptom management in PubMed provided the foundation for this paper.ConclusionDigital symptom monitoring technology provides a variety of opportunities for oncology nurses and NPs to efficiently extend and improve symptom management in multiple settings including cancer patients at home between clinic visits, at clinic visits, and during inpatient stays. Digital monitoring and patient engagement make possible frequent symptom assessments, just-in-time personalized self-management reinforcement, and judiciously alert nurses and NPs about key times for follow-up with patients supported with evidenced-based guidelines. Oncology nurses at all levels have the opportunity to be leaders in the adoption and expansion of digital tools to enhance their practice.Implications for Nursing PracticeOncology nurses and NPs can lead practice changes that improve patient outcomes through understanding and shaping the use of digital tools.     

Guidelines for evaluating tools for clinical decision making

Managed care is designed to reduce healthcare costs by controlling use of services and by improving quality outcomes. Preparation of nurses to practice in a health management environment mandates clear understanding of this new environment Nursing educators should focus on the spectrum of health services and enhance the nurses'ability to assess patients independently, implement health plans, and be responsible for outcomes. Nurses must understand how clinical decision-making tools facilitate planning care to maximize use of resources. The authors describe the construction and evaluation of a learning strategy that involves the use of guidelines to evaluate clinical decision-making tools. Two examples are presented: evaluating clinical pathways in a case management project and evaluating algorithm (practice guideline) outcome data from a prenatal population case study from a local health maintenance organization.     

Point-of-care testing for diabetes

Point-of-care testing, or near patient testing, refers to testing of biochemical parameters with devices that provide rapid results so the data can be immediately used in clinical care. Because the diagnosis and, in particular, management, of diabetes mellitus is largely relegated to the outpatient setting (including self-care in the home, school and workplace), point-of-care testing is particularly relevant for this disease. Moreover, the need for timely (immediate) results for glucose monitoring makes point-of-care testing necessary for the management of diabetes in the inpatient and outpatient setting. The following review examines the role of various assays in the diagnosis and management of diabetes and discusses the role of point-of-care testing.     

Assessment and monitoring of glycemic control in primary diabetes care: monitoring techniques, record keeping, meter downloads, tests of average glycemia, and point-of-care evaluation

PURPOSE: To present a review of glucose monitoring methods useful in primary care. DATA SOURCES: Pertinent publications in the literature, printed materials and resources, and the clinical experience of the authors as a referral center for care of patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Regular monitoring of glucose control is an integral and important aspect of diabetes care. It allows the advanced practice nurse (APN) to assess whether diabetes goals are being met or not, involves patients in the care of their disease, and assists in making informed treatment decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A working knowledge of glucose monitoring methods, monitors, testing devices, and laboratory tests is extremely beneficial for the APN in attaining standards of care for patients with diabetes.     

Using electronic health record data for substance use Screening,Brief Intervention,and Referral to Treatment among adults with type 2 diabetes: Design of a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study

BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act encourages healthcare systems to integrate behavioral and medical healthcare, as well as to employ electronic health records (EHRs) for health information exchange and quality improvement. Pragmatic research paradigms that employ EHRs in research are needed to produce clinical evidence in real-world medical settings for informing learning healthcare systems. Adults with comorbid diabetes and substance use disorders (SUDs) tend to use costly inpatient treatments; however, there is a lack of empirical data on implementing behavioral healthcare to reduce health risk in adults with high-risk diabetes. Given the complexity of high-risk patients' medical problems and the cost of conducting randomized trials, a feasibility project is warranted to guide practical study designs.MethodsWe describe the study design, which explores the feasibility of implementing substance use Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) among adults with high-risk type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) within a home-based primary care setting. Our study includes the development of an integrated EHR datamart to identify eligible patients and collect diabetes healthcare data, and the use of a geographic health information system to understand the social context in patients' communities. Analysis will examine recruitment, proportion of patients receiving brief intervention and/or referrals, substance use, SUD treatment use, diabetes outcomes, and retention.DiscussionBy capitalizing on an existing T2DM project that uses home-based primary care, our study results will provide timely clinical information to inform the designs and implementation of future SBIRT studies among adults with multiple medical conditions.     

Barriers to providing diabetes care in community health centers

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify barriers to improving care for individuals with diabetes in community health centers. These findings are important because many such patients, as in most other practice settings, receive care that does not meet evidence-based standards. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In 42 Midwestern health centers, we surveyed 389 health providers and administrators about the barriers they faced delivering diabetes care. We report on home blood glucose monitoring, HbA1c tests, dilated eye examinations, foot examinations, diet, and exercise, all of which are a subset of the larger clinical practice recommendations of the American Diabetes Association (ADA). RESULTS: Among the 279 (72%) respondents, providers perceived that patients were significantly less likely than providers to believe that key processes of care were important (overall mean on 30-point scale: providers 26.8, patients 18.2, P = 0.0001). Providers were more confident in their ability to instruct patients on diet and exercise than on their ability to help them make changes in these areas. Ratings of the importance of access to care and finances as barriers varied widely; however, >25% of the providers and administrators agreed that significant barriers included affordability of home blood glucose monitoring, HbA1c testing, dilated eye examination, and special diets; nonproximity of ophthalmologist; forgetting to order eye examinations and to examine patients' feet; time required to teach home blood glucose monitoring; and language or cultural barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Providers in health centers indicate a need to enhance behavioral change in diabetic patients. In addition, better health care delivery systems and reforms that improve the affordability, accessibility, and efficiency of care are also likely to help health centers meet ADA standards of care.     

Health care and health status and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate access and utilization of medical care, and health status and outcomes that would be influenced by recent medical care, in a representative sample of patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A national sample of 733 adults with type 2 diabetes was studied from 1991 to 1994 in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Structured questionnaires and clinical and laboratory assessments were used to determine the frequencies of physician visits, health insurance coverage, screening for diabetes complications, treatment for hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia; and the proportion of patients who met treatment goals and established criteria for health outcome measures including hyperglycemia, albuminuria, obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. RESULTS: Almost all patients had 1 source of primary care (95%), 2 or more physician visits during the past year (88%), and health insurance coverage (91%). Most (76%) were treated with insulin or oral agents for their diabetes, and 45% of those patients taking insulin monitored their blood glucose at least once per day The patients were frequently screened for retinopathy (52%), hypertension (88%), and dyslipidemia (84%). Of those patients with hypertension, 83% were diagnosed and treated with antihypertensive agents and only 17% were undiagnosed or untreated; most of the patients known to have dyslipidemia were treated with medication or diet (89%). Health status and outcomes were less than optimal: 58% had HbA1c >7.0, 45% had BMI >30, 28% had microalbuminuria, and 8% had clinical proteinuria. Of those patients known to have hypertension and dyslipidemia, 60% were not controlled to accepted levels. In addition, 22% of patients smoked cigarettes, 26% had to be hospitalized during the previous year, and 42% assessed their health status as fair or poor. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of health care access and utilization, screening for diabetes complications, and treatment of hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia in type 2 diabetes are high; however, health status and outcomes are unsatisfactory. There are likely to be multiple reasons for this discordance, including intractability of diabetes to current therapies, patient self-care practices, physician medical care practices, and characteristics of U.S. health care systems.