McCoy Rozalina G, Van Houten Holly K, Ross Joseph S, Montori Victor M, Shah Nilay D
Division of Primary Care Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic
Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic Robert D and Patricia E Kern Center for Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic.
BMJ. 2015 Dec 8;351:h6138. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h6138.
What is the extent and effect of excessive testing for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) among adults with controlled type 2 diabetes?
A retrospective analysis of data from a national administrative claims database included commercially insured individuals in the USA, 2001-13. Study patients were aged 18 years or older, had type 2 diabetes with stable glycemic control (two consecutive tests showing HbA1c<7.0% within 24 months), did not use insulin, had no history of severe hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia, and were not pregnant. HbA1c testing frequency was measured within 24 months after the second (index) HbA1c test, and classified as guideline recommended (≤ 2 times/year), frequent (3-4 times/year), and excessive (≥ 5 times/year). Changes in treatment regimen were ascertained within three months of the index test.
Of 31,545 patients in the study cohort (mean age 58 years; mean index HbA1c 6.2%), HbA1c testing frequency was excessive in 6% and frequent in 55%. Despite good glycemic control at baseline, treatment was further intensified by addition of glucose lowering drugs or insulin in 8.4% of patients (comprising 13%, 9%, and 7% of those tested excessively, frequently, and per guidelines, respectively; P<0.001). Compared with guideline recommended testing, excessive testing was associated with treatment intensification (odds ratio 1.35 (95% confidence interval 1.22 to 1.50)). Excessive testing rates remained unchanged in 2001-08, but fell significantly after 2009. The odds of excessive testing was 46% lower in 2011 than in 2001-02. The study population is not representative of all US patients with type 2 diabetes because it was restricted to commercially insured adults with stable and controlled diabetes not receiving insulin treatment. The study design did not capture the underuse of HbA1c testing.
In this US cohort of adults with stable and controlled type 2 diabetes, more than 60% received too many HbA1c tests, a practice associated with potential overtreatment with hypoglycemic drugs. Excessive testing contributes to the growing problem of waste in healthcare and increased patient burden in diabetes management.
FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: NDS and RGM are funded partly by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18HS18339) and AcademyHealth Delivery System Science Fellowship (2013), respectively. No competing interests declared. Additional data are available from mccoy.rozalina@mayo.edu.
在2型糖尿病病情得到控制的成年人中,糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)过度检测的程度和影响如何?
对2001 - 2013年美国全国商业保险索赔数据库中的数据进行回顾性分析。研究患者年龄在18岁及以上,患有2型糖尿病且血糖控制稳定(在24个月内连续两次检测显示HbA1c<7.0%),未使用胰岛素,无严重低血糖或高血糖病史,且未怀孕。在第二次(索引)HbA1c检测后的24个月内测量HbA1c检测频率,并分类为指南推荐(≤每年2次)、频繁(每年3 - 4次)和过度(≥每年5次)。在索引检测后的三个月内确定治疗方案的变化。
在研究队列中的31545名患者(平均年龄58岁;平均索引HbA1c为6.2%)中,6%的患者HbA1c检测频率过高,55%的患者检测频繁。尽管基线血糖控制良好,但仍有8.4%的患者通过添加降糖药物或胰岛素进一步强化治疗(分别占过度检测、频繁检测和遵循指南检测患者的13%、9%和7%;P<0.001)。与指南推荐的检测相比,过度检测与治疗强化相关(优势比1.35(95%置信区间1.22至1.50))。2001 - 2008年过度检测率保持不变,但2009年后显著下降。2011年过度检测的几率比2001 - 2002年低46%。该研究人群不能代表所有美国2型糖尿病患者,因为它仅限于商业保险的、患有稳定且得到控制的糖尿病且未接受胰岛素治疗的成年人。该研究设计未涵盖HbA1c检测不足的情况。
在这个美国稳定且病情得到控制的2型糖尿病成年人群体中,超过60%的人接受了过多的HbA1c检测,这种做法可能与降糖药物的过度治疗有关。过度检测加剧了医疗保健中日益严重的浪费问题,并增加了糖尿病管理中的患者负担。
资金、利益冲突、数据共享:NDS和RGM分别部分由医疗保健研究与质量局(R18HS18339)和美国卫生管理学会卫生服务系统科学奖学金(2013)资助。未声明存在利益冲突。可从mccoy.rozalina@mayo.edu获取更多数据。