Developing and validating a diabetes database in a large health system

University of Pittsburgh, Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, United States.
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (Impact Factor: 2.54). 04/2007; 75(3):313-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2006.07.007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT One component of clinical information systems is a registry of patients. Registries allow providers to identify gaps in care at the population level. Registries also allow for rapid cycle continuous quality improvement, targeted practice change and improved outcomes. Most registries are built based on membership with an insurer or other selection criteria. Little, if any data exist on registries representing demographically heterogeneous populations.
Administrative and clinical data for the period 1/1/2000-12/30/03 were examined. In total, 46,082,941 lab reports, 233,292,544 medical records, and 9,351,415 medical record abstracts, representing approximately 2 million unique patients were searched. The diabetes source population was identified by presence of any one of the following criteria: ICD-9 code 250 (diabetes) for inpatient, emergency room or outpatient visits; any hemoglobin A1c result; blood glucose >200mg/dl; or diabetes medication. A diagnosis of diabetes was verified by trained chart reviewers on a sample of patients. Single indicators and combinations were examined to determine optimal identification of these cases.
In two separate validation studies, using two or more indicators or outpatient diagnosis maximized positive predictive value (PPV) (96 and 97%) and sensitivity (99 and 100%) and identified 55,807 individuals. When all patients with a single indicator of outpatient diagnosis (which had the highest single PPV of 94 and 95%) were included together with those having >or=2 indicators, the final sample size was 65,725.
Two or more indicators or an out-patient-diagnosis identifies a sizeable and unselective diabetes database which can be used to track processes and outcomes.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: With the increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes in young adulthood, treatment of diabetes in pregnancy faces new challenges. Anti-diabetic drug utilization patterns of pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes are poorly described. We aim to describe anti-diabetic (AD) agent utilization among diabetic pregnant women. We utilized IMS LifeLink, including administrative claims data of patients in US managed care plans, to establish a retrospective cohort of women, age 18-46 years (N = 96,740) with billed procedures for a live birth, and a 12 month eligibility period before and 3 month after delivery. Diabetes mellitus was identified from >=2 in- or outpatient claims with diagnoses (ICD-9-CM 250.XX) before pregnancy. We estimated the prevalence of AD drugs before, during and after pregnancy, and secular trends across the study period (1999-2009), using linear regression. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify the extent of misclassification of trimesters. Almost six percent (n = 5,581) of the live birth cohort had diabetes mellitus. Throughout the study, 48% (1999) and 78% (2009) (p < 0.0001) of diabetic women received AD drugs during pregnancy. The most common AD drugs during pregnancy were insulin, metformin, sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones (TZD), and combination AD. The annual prevalence of insulin use increased by only 1% from 39% (1999) to 40% (2009) (p = 0.589) during pregnancy, while use of sulfonylureas and metformin increased from 2.5% and 4.2% (1999) to 17.3% and 15.3% (2009) (p < 0.0001), respectively. Insulin and sulfonylurea use steadily increased in prevalence from the 1st to 3rd trimester (16.5% and 3.3% to 33.0% and 7.5%), while metformin and TZD use decreased (11.4% and 1.6% to 3.8% and 0.2%). AD use during pregnancy demonstrates the need for additional investigation regarding safety and efficacy of AD drugs on maternal outcomes.
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 01/2014; 14(1):28. DOI:10.1186/1471-2393-14-28 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Circulation 08/2014; 37(10). DOI:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000034 · 14.95 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for women and men with diabetes. Previous cross-sectional studies of prevalent diabetes have found that women are less likely to meet American Diabetes Association (ADA) and American Heart Association guidelines for control of cardiovascular risk factors (hemoglobin A1c, low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol, and blood pressure), but have not studied the critical period immediately after diagnosis. To assess gender differences in cardiovascular risk factors at the time of diabetes diagnosis (baseline) and 1 year later (follow-up), we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 6,547 individuals with incident diabetes in an integrated care delivery system. We assessed mean cardiovascular risk factor values by gender and adjusted odds ratios of attaining ADA goals. Compared with men, at baseline women had lower hemoglobin A1c (7.9% vs. 8.2%; p < .001), higher LDL cholesterol (118.9 vs. 111.5 mg/dL; p < .001), higher systolic blood pressure (131.9 vs. 130.5 mmHg; p < .001), and lower diastolic blood pressure (79.1 vs. 79.7 mmHg; p = .006). At follow-up, the hemoglobin A1c gender gap had closed (6.9% vs. 6.9%; p = .39), and the gender gaps had decreased for blood pressure (129.8/77.0 vs. 128.9/77.6; p = .009) and LDL cholesterol (104.0 vs. 98.2 mg/dL; p < .001). These associations varied by age. Adjusted odds ratios showed similar relationships. In this cohort of individuals with incident diabetes, men and women had important differences in risk factor control at the time of diabetes diagnosis. These differences varied by age and decreased over time.
    Women s Health Issues 01/2014; 24(1):e61-e68. DOI:10.1016/j.whi.2013.09.008 · 1.61 Impact Factor