Quality of diabetes care at the largest outpatient clinics in Vilnius
Public Health
Žydrūnė Visockienė
Laura Šiaulienė
Roma Puronaitė
Virginijus Šapoka
Vytautas Kasiulevičius
Published 2016-07-31
https://doi.org/10.6001/actamedica.v23i2.3329
PDF

Keywords

quality of diabetes care
diabetes mellitus
average HbA1c

How to Cite

Visockienė Žydrūnė, Šiaulienė L., Puronaitė R., Šapoka V. and Kasiulevičius V. (2016) “Quality of diabetes care at the largest outpatient clinics in Vilnius”, Acta medica Lituanica, 23(2), pp. 126-134. doi: 10.6001/actamedica.v23i2.3329.

Abstract

Background. Essential data on the  quality of diabetes care needed for the development of National Diabetes Programme in Lithuania are lacking. The aim of the study was to assess the quality of diabetes care compared to the local guidelines in Vilnius, Lithuania. Materials and methods. Retrospective data collection covering the period from 2012 to 2013 was performed in 5 Vilnius outpatient clinics assessing process and outcome indicators in type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) subjects. Results. In a sample of 1,719 patients (58.9% women, 92.6% T2DM) the annual HbA1c assessment rate was 88.6%. Glycaemic control was significantly better in T2DM compared to T1DM patients: average HbA1c was 7.0 ± 1.4% vs 9.1 ± 1.8% and HbA1c ≤ 7% in 59 vs 9.4%, respectively (p < 0.001); referrals to an endocrinologist were recommended in 56.3% of cases. Annual screening for diabetic foot, retinopathy, nephropathy, renal function and lipids was performed in 4.6, 24.4, 2.3, 29.3 and 13.2% of patients, respectively, with higher performance rate of retinal screening and urinary microalbumin in T1DM; BMI and blood pressure were recorded for 50.2 and 97.2% of patients, respectively. Prevalence of nephropathy, polyneuropathy, retinopathy, and angiopathy was 8.4, 36.2, 10.7 and 7.7%, respectively, with the higher prevalence in T1DM. Conclusions. The analysis revealed good glycaemic control in T2DM, but insufficient in T1DM. Continuous monitoring of diabetes complications and cardiovascular risk factors did not meet the local Diabetes Care Guidelines.
PDF
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Most read articles by the same author(s)