Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (16)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goudswaard, A. N
Right arrow Articles by Rutten, G. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Goudswaard, A. N
Right arrow Articles by Rutten, G. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 20, No. 2, 173-177
© Oxford University Press 2003

Health Services Research

Quality of recording of data from patients with type 2 diabetes is not a valid indicator of quality of care. A cross-sectional study

Alex N Goudswaard, Kahnh Lam, Ronald P Stolk and Guy EHM Rutten

Julius Center for Health Science and Primary Care, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Correspondence to Alex N Goudswaard; E-mail: lex{at}goudswaard.cx

Background. The quality of recording of clinical data in diabetes care in general practices is very variable. It has been suggested that better recording leads to improved glycaemic control.

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to assess the completeness of recording by GPs of data from type 2 diabetes patients; to compare recorded and missing data; and to investigate the association between completeness and glycaemic control.

Methods. A cross-sectional survey was carried out in 52 general practices. Medical records were scrutinized for the presence of 11 variables. Examining patients through an active approach completed incomplete records. We compared recorded and unrecorded items. Completeness of recording was determined at both patient and practice levels.

Results. Fifty-two general practices with 1641 type 2 diabetes patients cared for by the GP participated. The frequency of absence of any particular item ranged from 20 to 70%. Weight, systolic blood pressure and HbA1c were slightly lower in patients with those items missing on their files, and more such patients were non-smokers (P < 0.05). The percentage of patients with unrecorded variables that exceeded target values ranged from 39 to 75. Neither at practice level nor at patient level was any association between the completeness of the data recording and HbA1c found.

Conclusion. Records often were incomplete, which hampers a systematic approach to care of diabetic patients. However, the lack of association between completeness of data recording and control of glycaemia indicates that improved recording is not a valid indicator of good quality of care.

Keywords. Diabetes mellitus, glycaemic control, organization of care, primary care, quality of care, recording of data.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
J. S. Tabrizi, A. J. Wilson, P. K. O'Rourke, and E. T. Coyne
Patient Perspectives on Consistency of Medical Care With Recommended Care in Type 2 Diabetes
Diabetes Care, November 1, 2007; 30(11): 2855 - 2856.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
C. F. Schaars, P. Denig, W. N. Kasje, R. E. Stewart, B. H.R. Wolffenbuttel, and F. M. Haaijer-Ruskamp
Physician, Organizational, and Patient Factors Associated With Suboptimal Blood Pressure Management in Type 2 Diabetic Patients in Primary Care
Diabetes Care, January 1, 2004; 27(1): 123 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Fam PractHome page
C Segovia
Quality of records and quality of care
Fam. Pract., October 1, 2003; 20(5): 612 - 612.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.