Quality of Diabetes Mellitus Care by Rural Primary Care Physicians

• Published in: The Journal of rural health Vol. 28; no. 4; pp. 364 - 371
• Main Authors: Tonks, Stephen A., Makwana, Sohil, Salanitro, Amanda H., Safford, Monika M., Houston, Thomas K., Allison, Jeroan J., Curry, William, Estrada, Carlos A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Malden, USA Blackwell Publishing Inc 01.09.2012; Wiley-Blackwell; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Biochemistry; Blood; Blood Glucose - analysis; Blood Pressure; British petroleum company limited; Correlation; Diabetes; Diabetes Mellitus - therapy; Diabetics; Diagnostic Tests; family medicine; Female; Geographic Regions; health disparities; Health Services; Humans; internal medicine; Lipoproteins, LDL - blood; Male; medical care; Medical service; Metabolism; Middle Aged; Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care); Patients; Physicians; Physicians, Primary Care - standards; Physiology; Place of Residence; Primary care; Primary Health Care; quality; Quality Indicators, Health Care - statistics & numerical data; Quality of care; Quality of Health Care; Residence; Rural Areas; Rural communities; Rural health care; Rural Health Services - standards; Southeastern United States - epidemiology; Statistical Significance; Trend Analysis; United States; Southeastern United States
• ISSN: 0890-765X; 1748-0361
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2012.00410.x

Purpose: To explore the relationship between degree of rurality and glucose (hemoglobin A1c), blood pressure (BP), and lipid (LDL) control among patients with diabetes. Methods: Descriptive study; 1,649 patients in 205 rural practices in the United States. Patients’ residence ZIP codes defined degree of rurality (Rural‐Urban Commuting Areas codes). Outcomes were measures of acceptable control (A1c < = 9%, BP < 140/90 mmHg, LDL < 130 mg/dL) and optimal control (A1c < 7%, BP < 130/80 mmHg, LDL < 100 mg/dL). Statistical significance was set at P < .008 (Bonferroni's correction). Findings: Although the proportion of patients with reasonable A1c control worsened by increasing degree of rurality, the differences were not statistically significant (urban 90%, large rural 88%, small rural 85%, isolated rural 83%; P= .10); mean A1c values also increased by degree of rurality, although not statistically significant (urban 7.2 [SD 1.6], large rural 7.3 [SD 1.7], small rural 7.5 [SD 1.8], isolated rural 7.5 [SD 1.9]; P= .16). We observed no differences between degree of rural and reasonable BP or LDL control (P= .42, P= .23, respectively) or optimal A1c or BP control (P= .52, P= .65, respectively). Optimal and mean LDL values worsened as rurality increased (P= .08, P= .029, respectively). Conclusions: In patients with diabetes who seek care in the rural Southern United States, we observed no relationship between degree of rurality of patients’ residence and traditional measures of quality of care. Further examination of the trends and explanatory factors for relative worsening of metabolic control by increasing degree of rurality is warranted.