Status of diabetes care among community pharmacy patients with diabetes: Analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey
ABSTRACT To determine the status of diabetes care among community pharmacy patients with diabetes.
Cross-sectional observational study.
United States, 2005.
1,455 community pharmacy patients aged 18 years or older with diabetes who were diagnosed before 2005.Intervention: Analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.
Proportions of patients meeting American Diabetes Association (ADA) standards of medical care in diabetes.
In 2005, 1,455 patients with diabetes who were diagnosed before 2005 filled prescriptions through community pharmacies. Gaps occurred between the diabetes care of these patients and ADA standards. Examples include the following: ADA recommends at least two glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) tests annually, but 19.52% of the study population reported less than two A1C tests in 2005; ADA recommends annual influenza vaccinations, but 42.46% of the study population reported not receiving an influenza vaccination in 2005; and ADA recommends weight control, but 83.74% of the study population was overweight or obese.
The current results demonstrate that many patients with diabetes are not receiving adequate care and that pharmacists have an opportunity to improve diabetes management.
- SourceAvailable from: Leonardo Pereira[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To analyze the costs related to visits and drug prescription in outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus assisted by a pharmaceutical care service. A prospective and experimental study was carried out. Seventy one patients were divided into two groups: control and pharmaceutical care. Patients in the pharmaceutical care group were followed up monthly by a single clinical pharmacist. The pharmaceutical care group had a statistically significant reduction in costs of metformin and emergency department visits, and increased costs with their family physicians. On the other hand, the control group had a statistically significant increase of 21.3% in the general costs of treatment and visits. The pharmaceutical care group maintained the same costs related to drugs and visits, while the control group showed a significant increase in general costs.Arquivos brasileiros de endocrinologia e metabologia 12/2011; 55(9):686-91. DOI:10.1590/S0004-27302011000900003 · 0.84 Impact Factor