Use of forms for follow-up of diabetes in general practice.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Larun L;Larun L; Bjørner T; Bjørner T; Fretheim A; Fretheim A; Brurberg KG; Brurberg KG
  • Source:
    Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke [Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen] 2016 Mar 15; Vol. 136 (5), pp. 417-22. Date of Electronic Publication: 2016 Mar 15 (Print Publication: 2016).
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Language:
    English; Norwegian
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Norske Laegeforening Country of Publication: Norway NLM ID: 0413423 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 0807-7096 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00292001 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Oslo : Norske Laegeforening
      Original Publication: Chistiania : Alb. Cammermeyer, 1880-
    • Subject Terms:
      Checklist* ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2*/complications ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2*/mortality ; Electronic Health Records*; Adult ; Blood Pressure ; Decision Support Systems, Clinical ; Diabetic Retinopathy/complications ; General Practice ; Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis ; Humans ; Myocardial Infarction/complications ; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/complications ; Primary Health Care ; Risk ; Stroke/complications
    • Abstract:
      Background: The majority of patients with type 2 diabetes are followed up in general practice. We have investigated whether the use of forms by GPs for recording clinical data contributes to lower mortality and morbidity for this patient group.
      Material and Method: This systematic review is based on literature searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL and PubMed. We included studies that 1) dealt with adults over 18 years of age with diabetes who were followed up in the primary health service and 2) compared mortality and morbidity with and without the use of forms. We summarised the results qualitatively and using meta-analyses.
      Results: Seven studies were included. One study (1262 participants) investigated the effect of the form on hard endpoints, without finding clear effects on mortality (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.72-1.14), retinopathy (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.53-1.52), peripheral nerve injury (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.57-1.29), myocardial infarction (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.31-1.35) or stroke (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.39-2.01). Use of forms appears to have little or no effect on body weight (3 studies), and a small, positive effect on blood pressure (5 studies) and total cholesterol (2 studies).
      Interpretation: Published data at present provide no clear answers, but shows that use of forms in the follow-up of patients with diabetes in general practice may tend to contribute to lower mortality and morbidity.
    • Comments:
      Comment in: Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2016 May 03;136(8):688-9. (PMID: 27143448)
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Glycated Hemoglobin A)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20160317 Date Completed: 20160916 Latest Revision: 20221207
    • Publication Date:
      20231215
    • Accession Number:
      10.4045/tidsskr.15.1174
    • Accession Number:
      26983145