OBJECTIVE: To identify problems faced by older adults with diabetes due to out-of-pocket medication costs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional national survey of 875 adults with diabetes treated with hypoglycemic medication, respondents reported whether they had underused prescription medications due to cost pressures or had experienced other financial problems associated with medication costs such as forgoing basic necessities. Respondents also described their interactions with clinicians about medication costs. RESULTS: A total of 19% of respondents reported cutting back on medication use in the prior year due to cost, 11% reported cutting back on their diabetes medications, and 7% reported cutting back on their diabetes medications at least once per month. Moreover, 28% reported forgoing food or other essentials to pay medication costs, 14% increased their credit card debt, and 10% borrowed money from family or friends to pay for their prescriptions. Medication cost problems were especially common among respondents who were younger, had higher monthly out-of-pocket costs, and had no prescription drug coverage. In general, few respondents, including those reporting medication cost problems, reported that their health care providers had given them information or other assistance to address medication cost pressures. CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-pocket medication costs pose a significant burden to many adults with diabetes and contribute to decreased treatment adherence. Clinicians should actively identify patients with diabetes who are facing medication cost pressures and assist them by modifying their medication regimens, helping them understand the importance of each prescribed medication, providing information on sources of low-cost drugs, and linking patients with coverage programs.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relative impact of physician groups and health plans on quality of care measures. DESIGN: Secondary data analysis of receipt of preventive care services included in the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) among 10 758 patients representing 21 health maintenance organizations and 22 large provider groups in the San Francisco and Los Angeles, California, areas in 1997. Each patient was eligible for (at least) one of six HEDIS-measured services. Data identify whether or not the service was provided, the patient's health plan, and the provider group responsible for the care. We used logistic regression to examine variations across plans in HEDIS rates, and whether variations persist after controls for provider groups are included.

SETTING: Patients from 21 health maintenance organizations serving San Francisco and Los Angeles, California, in 1997.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Breast cancer screening, childhood immunizations, cervical cancer screening, diabetic retinal exam, prenatal care in the first trimester, and check-ups after delivery among patients for whom these services are appropriate.

RESULTS: There are statistically significant differences across health plans in utilization rates for the six services examined. These differences are not substantially affected when we control for the provider group that cared for the patient. That is, controlling for provider group does not explain variations across plans, consistent with the view that health plans have an impact on HEDIS quality measures independent of the providers that they contract with.

CONCLUSIONS: There are activities that plans can undertake which influence their HEDIS scores. On the face of it, these results suggest that plans can independently improve quality, in contrast to hypotheses that plans would be "too far" from patients to have an influence. Continued attention to collecting plan-level data is warranted. Further work should address other possible sources of variations in HEDIS scores, such as variability in the quality of plan administrative databases.

Diabetes mellitus is a leading cause of morbidity and death in the United States. Type 2 diabetes mellitus accounts for the majority of affected persons (90% to 95%) and affects older adults, particularly those older than 50 years of age. It affects an estimated 16 million Americans, 11 million of whom have both diabetes and hypertension. Most adverse diabetes outcomes are a result of vascular complications. These complications are generally classified as microvascular, such as retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy (although neuropathy may not be entirely a microvascular disease), or macrovascular, such as coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral vascular disease.

In order to prevent, or diminish the progression of, microvascular and macrovascular complications, recommended diabetes management necessarily encompasses both metabolic control and cardiovascular risk factor control. The need for good glycemic control is supported by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial in type 1 diabetes mellitus and, more recently, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) in type 2 diabetes mellitus. In these studies, tight blood sugar control reduced microvascular complications, such as nephropathy and retinopathy, but had little effect on macrovascular outcomes. Up to 80% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus will develop or die of macrovascular disease, underscoring the importance of preventing macrovascular complications.

In an effort to provide internists and other primary care physicians with effective management strategies for diabetes care, the American College of Physicians decided to develop guidelines on the management of hypertension in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The target audience for this guideline is all clinicians who provide care to patients with type 2 diabetes. The target patient population is all persons with type 2 diabetes who have hypertension, defined as systolic blood pressure of at least 140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure of at least 90 mm Hg. This target patient population includes those who already have some form of microvascular complication and, of particular importance, premenopausal women with diabetes. We will attempt to answer the following questions: 1) What are the benefits of tight blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes? 2) What should the target levels of systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure be for patients with type 2 diabetes? and 3) Are certain antihypertensive agents more effective or beneficial in patients with diabetes?

When analyzing benefit or effectiveness for this review, we included only studies that measured clinical end points. The four major classes of clinical end points were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or congestive heart failure), and microvascular complications (photocoagulation, nephropathy, neuropathy, or amputation).

The review was divided into two categories. The first included studies that evaluated the effects of blood pressure control if the comparison examined an antihypertensive drug versus placebo or the effects of different target blood pressure levels. The second category evaluated the effect of different classes of drugs. A discussion of this evidence follows.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes, especially in developing countries, has grown over the past decades. We performed a controlled clinical study to determine whether a community-based, group-centered public health intervention addressing nutrition and exercise can ameliorate glycemic control and associated cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients in rural Costa Rica.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 75 adults with type 2 diabetes, mean age 59 years, were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. All participants received basic diabetes education. The subjects in the intervention group participated in 11 weekly nutrition classes (90 min each session). Subjects for whom exercise was deemed safe also participated in triweekly walking groups (60 min each session). Glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL and LDL cholesterol, height, weight, BMI, and blood pressure were measured at baseline and the end of the study (after 12 weeks).

RESULTS: The intervention group lost 1.0 +/- 2.2 kg compared with a weight gain in the control group of 0.4 +/- 2.3 kg (P = 0.028). Fasting plasma glucose decreased 19 +/- 55 mg/dl in the intervention group and increased 16 +/- 78 mg/dl in the control group (P = 0.048). Glycosylated hemoglobin decreased 1.8 +/- 2.3% in the intervention group and 0.4 +/- 2.3% in the control group (P = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS: Glycemic control of type 2 diabetic patients can be improved through community-based, group-centered public health interventions addressing nutrition and exercise. This pilot study provides an economically feasible model for programs that aim to improve the health status of people with type 2 diabetes.

Evidence-Based Medicine 1996 Jul-Aug;1:158. Comment on Javitt JC, Aiello LP. Cost-effectiveness of detecting and treating diabetic retinopathy

Background: The California Diabetes and Pregnancy Program is a new preventive approach to improving pregnancy outcomes through intensive diabetes management preconception and early in pregnancy.

Methods: Hospital charges and length of stay data were collected on 102 program enrollees and 218 control cases. Ninety program enrollees and 90 control cases were matched on mother's age. White's classification, and race. Regression models controlled for these variables in addition to MediCal status, birth weight, and enrollment in the program.

Results: Hospital charges were about 30% less for program participants and days in the hospital were roughly 25% less. The program effects were larger for women that enrolled before 8 weeks gestation. More serious diabetics were also found to have larger reductions in charges and days.

Conclusion: After adjusting for inflation and differences in charges across hospitals, $5.19 is saved for every dollar spent on the program.