title: Prompting the clinical care of non-insulin dependent (type II) diabetic patients in an inner city area: one model of community care.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of centrally organised prompting for coordinating community care of non-insulin dependent diabetic patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  Randomised single centre trial. Patients allocated to prompted care in the community or to continued attendance at hospital diabetic clinic (controls). Median follow up two years.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two hospital outpatient clinics, 38 general practices, and 11 optometrists in the catchment area of a district general hospital in Islington.
  
  
  METHODS
  181 patients attending hospital outpatient clinics.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  There is no difference in process of medical care measures and medical outcome between prompted community care and hospital clinic care.
  
  
  RESULTS
  14 hospital patients failed to receive a single review in the clinic as compared with three patients in the prompted group (chi 2 = 6.1, df = 1; p = 0.013). Follow up for retinal screening was better in prompted patients than in controls; two prompted patients defaulted as against 12 controls (chi 2 = 6.9, df = 1; p = 0.008). Three measures per patient yearly were more frequent in prompted patients: tests for albuminuria (median 3.0 v 2.3; p = 0.03), plasma glucose estimations (3.1 v 2.5; p = 0.003), and glycated haemoglobin estimations (2.4 v 0.9; p < 0.001). Continuity of care was better in the prompted group (3.2 v 2.2 reviews by each doctor seen; p < 0.001). The study ended with no significant differences between the groups in last recorded random plasma glucose concentration, glycated haemoglobin value, numbers admitted to hospital for a diabetes related reason, and number of deaths. Questionnaires revealed a high level of patient, general practitioner, and optometrist satisfaction.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Six monthly prompting of non-insulin treated diabetic patients for care by inner city general practitioners and by optometrists is effective and acceptable.
authors: Department of Medicine, University College School of Medicine, Whittington Hospital, London.
authors: B
authors: B
authors: Hurwitz
authors: C
authors: C
authors: Goodman
authors: J
authors: J
authors: Yudkin
mesh_terms: D000553:Ambulatory Care; D001071:Appointments and Schedules; D003153:Community Health Services; D003924:Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Q000628:therapy*; D005194:Family Practice; D005246:Feedback; D006801:Humans; D008131:London; D008875:Middle Aged; D010044:Outpatient Clinics, Hospital; D010349:Patient Compliance; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D012017:Referral and Consultation; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014505:Urban Population