Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 152 No. 2526 (2022)

Quality of chronic care for patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without a Clinical Specialized Medical Assistant (CSMA) – a cross-sectional study from Switzerland

  • Anna-Katharina Ansorg
  • Katharina Tabea Jungo
  • Esther Hilfiker
  • Rainer Felber
  • Judith Trageser
  • Beat Pierre Arnet
  • Marianne Schenk
  • Sven Streit
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/SMW.2022.w30180
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2022;152:w30180
Published
22.06.2022

Summary

BACKGROUND: Due to Switzerland’s shortage of general practitioners (GPs), task shifting through interprofessional collaboration is needed to relieve GPs’ workload and allow the continued provision of quality care. The profession of specialized medical assistant (SMA) was created in Switzerland several years ago to provide a career advancement opportunity for medical practice assistants (MPAs) and intended to counteract the increasing scarcity of resources in primary care. Clinical specialized medical assistants (CSMAs) are trained to care for a set of chronic conditions, such as diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without CSMAs. Further, we aimed to investigate whether evidence exists that CSMA care models may allow for task shifting and the provision of interprofessional care while maintaining a high quality of care and to assess patient experiences with diabetes care in both care models.

METHODS: The present study was a paper-based cross-sectional survey of patient data. A total of 171 patients with type 2 diabetes who had been under the care of either a GP with CSMA (91 patients) or a GP without CSMA (80 patients) for at least one year were consecutively recruited for the study. Data were collected from mid-September 2020 to mid-June 2021. For the statistical analyses, we used descriptive statistics and t-tests.

RESULTS: Patients from both practice types were comparable in age, gender and diabetes-relevant factors such as Body Mass Index, smoking status and blood pressure. Overall, patients in both models received a high quality of care (Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, DTSQ >32/36 points, SGED >75 points) and a low treatment burden (Treatment Burden Questionnaire, TBQ <20/150 points). When comparing patients’ DTSQ, SGED and TBQ in both groups, we found no significant differences in diabetes-specific satisfaction (32.1 [SD 3.6] vs. 32.4 [SD 3.8], p = 0.7), SGED score (80.2 [SD 8.5] vs. 75.9 [SD 4.8], p = 0.18) or treatment burden (19.2 [SD 15.6] vs. 18.8 [SD 21.4], p = 0.89).

CONCLUSION: Our comparison of patient-reported outcomes and SGED criteria of patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without CSMAs showed an equally high quality of care and a low treatment burden. More research is needed on the long-term effects and benefits of the care provided by CSMAs and which other tasks could be shifted to CSMAs to reduce the burden on GPs in the future. At the same time, an increasing number of patients with type 2 diabetes will require high-quality primary care.

References

  1. Wagner EH. Academia, chronic care, and the future of primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Sep;25(S4 Suppl 4):S636–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1442-6
  2. World Health Organization (WHO). Framework for Action on Inter-professional Education and Collaborative Practice. Genf. 2010.
  3. Schweiz. Akademie der Med. Wissenschaften. Interprofessionelle Zusammenarbeit in der Gesundheitsversorgung: erfolgskritische Dimensionen und Fördermassnahmen. Differenzierung, Praxis und Implementierung. Swiss Academies Communications. 2020, 15 (2).
  4. de Bont A, van Exel J, Coretti S, Ökem ZG, Janssen M, Hope KL, et al.; MUNROS Team. Reconfiguring health workforce: a case-based comparative study explaining the increasingly diverse professional roles in Europe. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Nov;16(1):637. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1898-0
  5. Busca E, Savatteri A, Calafato TL, Mazzoleni B, Barisone M, Dal Molin A. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nurse’s role in primary care settings: an integrative review. BMC Nurs. 2021 Sep;20(1):171. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00696-y
  6. Chmiel C, Giewer I, Frei A, Rosemann T. Four-year long-term follow-up of diabetes patients after implementation of the Chronic Care Model in primary care: a cross-sectional study. Swiss Med Wkly. 2017 Oct;147(4344):w14522. https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2017.14522
  7. Yeoh EK, Wong MC, Wong EL, Yam C, Poon CM, Chung RY, et al. Benefits and limitations of implementing Chronic Care Model (CCM) in primary care programs: A systematic review. Int J Cardiol. 2018 May;258:279–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.11.057
  8. Frei A, Senn O, Huber F, Vecellio M, Steurer J, Woitzek K, et al. Congruency of diabetes care with the Chronic Care Model in different Swiss health care organisations from the patients’ perspective: a cross sectional study. Swiss Med Wkly. 2014 Sep;144:w13992. https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2014.13992
  9. Peytremann-Bridevaux I, Bordet J, Burnand B. Diabetes care in Switzerland: good, but perfectible: a population-based cross-sectional survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Jun;13(1):232. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-232
  10. Ammann L, Fäh D. Potential für Früherkennung von Diabetes mellitus Typ 2. Schweiz Arzteztg. 2019;100(8):264–6. https://doi.org/10.4414/saez.2019.06895
  11. Einarson TR, Acs A, Ludwig C, Panton UH. Prevalence of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: a systematic literature review of scientific evidence from across the world in 2007-2017. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2018 Jun;17(1):83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12933-018-0728-6
  12. Huber CA, Wieser S. Die Schweiz zahlt hohen Preis für nichtübertragbare Krankheiten. Schweiz Arzteztg. 2018;99(33):1054–6. https://doi.org/10.4414/saez.2018.06916
  13. Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Hessler D. The impact of non-severe hypoglycemia on quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Complications. 2018 Apr;32(4):373–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2018.01.014
  14. Bradley C, Eschwège E, de Pablos-Velasco P, Parhofer KG, Simon D, Vandenberghe H, et al. Predictors of Quality of Life and Other Patient-Reported Outcomes in the PANORAMA Multinational Study of People With Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2018 Feb;41(2):267–76. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-2655
  15. Kaewput W, Thongprayoon C, Varothai N, Sirirungreung A, Rangsin R, Bathini T, et al. Prevalence and associated factors of hospitalization for dysglycemia among elderly type 2 diabetes patients: A nationwide study. World J Diabetes. 2019 Mar;10(3):212–23. https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v10.i3.212
  16. Bundesamt für Statistik. Statistischer Atlas der Schweiz - Ärztedichte im ambulanten Sektor. [Online] 2020. [Cited: 12 14, 2021.] https://www.atlas.bfs.admin.ch/maps/13/de/16437_5141_4422_7264/25649.html
  17. Zeller A. Resultate der 4. Workforce Studie. Primary and Hospital Care – Allgemeine. Inn Med. 2020;20(11):325–8.
  18. Diallo, B. Wer strebt am Ende des Medizinstudiums eine Hausärztekarriere an? Umfrage unter Schweizer Studierenden. Praxis (Bern 1994). 2019 Sep., 108 (12)., pp. 779-786. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-8157/a003300.
  19. Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract. 1998 Aug-Sep;1(1):2–4.
  20. odamed, OdA Berufsbildung Medizinische Praxisassistentin. odamed. http://www.odamed.ch/home.html. [Online] [Cited: 12 14, 2021.]
  21. Sahli R. Chronic Care Management in der Hausarztpraxis. . Primary and Hospital Care Allge  Inn Med. 2017;17(3):46–50.
  22. Frei, A. The Chronic CARe for diAbeTes study (CARAT): a cluster randomized controlled trial. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2010 Jun, 15; 9:23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2840-9-23.
  23. Carlander, M. Wissenschaftliche Begleitevaluation: SWICA Disease Management Programm Diabetes Mellitus. Winterthur: ZHAW Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften. 2010 Mar, zhaw-21956. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-21956.
  24. Steurer-Stey, C. Evidenz und Kosteneffizienz des Chronic Care Models. Institut für Hausarztmedizin, Universität Zürich.
  25. QualiCCare, SGED. Anwendungshilfe zu den Kriterien für „gutes“ Disease Management Diabetes in der Grundversorgung. [Online] 2017 Nov. [Cited: 12 14, 2021.]
  26. Chmiel C, Birnbaum B, Gensichen J, Rosemann T, Frei A. Das Diabetes-Ampelschema - Entwicklung eines Instruments für das hausärztliche Case Management bei Patienten mit Diabetes mellitus. Praxis (Bern). 2011 Nov;100(24):1457–73. https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-8157/a000751
  27. Lorig KR, Sobel DS, Stewart AL, Brown BW Jr, Bandura A, Ritter P, et al. Evidence suggesting that a chronic disease self-management program can improve health status while reducing hospitalization: a randomized trial. Med Care. 1999 Jan;37(1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101671 https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199901000-00003
  28. SVA. Schweiz. Verband Med. Praxis-Fachpersonen. SVA. https://www.sva.ch. [Online] [Cited: 11 22, 2021.]
  29. Bradley C. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire: DTSQ. Handbook of Psychology and Diabetes: a guide to psychological measurement in diabetes research and practice. Chur, Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publishers. 1994, pp. 111-132. URL: https://www.healthpsychologyresearch.com (Status as of 22.11.21).
  30. Bradley C, Lewis KS. Measures of psychological well-being and treatment satisfaction developed from the responses of people with tablet-treated diabetes. Diabet Med. 1990 Jun;7(5):445–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.1990.tb01421.x
  31. Kubiak, T. Erfassung der diabetesbezogenen Therapiezufriedenheit mit der deutschsprachigen Fassung des Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) – psychometrische Eigenschaften und Validierung. Diabetes und Stoffwechsel. 12 (1), 56.
  32. Health Psychology Research. Health Psychology Research. [Online] https://www.healthpsychologyresearch.com
  33. Tran VT, et al. Development and description of measurement properties of an instrument to assess treatment burden among patients with multiple chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2012, 10:68. URL: https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/, pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-10-68
  34. Tran VT, Montori VM, Ravaud P. Is My Patient Overwhelmed?: Determining Thresholds for Acceptable Burden of Treatment Using Data From the ComPaRe e-Cohort. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020 Mar;95(3):504–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.09.004
  35. ITSA | Inter-Translations SA, Bern, Switzerland. www.itsa.ch. [Online] [Cited: 12 01, 2021.]
  36. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003 May;41(5):582–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C
  37. Korytkowski MT, Koerbel GL, Kotagal L, Donihi A, DiNardo MM. Pilot trial of diabetes self-management education in the hospital setting. Prim Care Diabetes. 2014 Oct;8(3):187–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2013.11.008
  38. Riesen WF. ESC/EAS-Dyslipidämie-Guidelines. Swiss Med Forum. 2020 Feb, 20 (9-10): 140-148, pp. 140-148.
  39. Meier R, Valeri F, Senn O, Rosemann T, Chmiel C. Quality performance and associated factors in Swiss diabetes care - A cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2020 May;15(5):e0232686. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232686
  40. Competence Network Health Workforce. Competence Network Health Workforce. [Online] https://www.cnhw.ch
  41. Plattform Interprofessionalität. Plattform Interprofessionalität. https://www.interprofessionalitaet.ch. [Online] [Cited: 12 13, 2021.]
  42. SAMW. SAMW Award «Interprofessionalität». https://www.samw.ch/de/Projekte/Uebersicht-der-Projekte/Interprofessionalitaet/Award.html. [Online] [Cited: 12 13, 2021.]
  43. Interprofessionalität BA. im Rahmen des Förderprogramms «Interprofessionalität im Gesundheitswesen» 2017-2020. https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/de/home/das-bag/publikationen/forschungsberichte/forschungsberichte-interprofessionalitaet-im-gesundheits. [Online] [Cited: 12 14, 2021.]
  44. Vargas RB, Mangione CM, Asch S, Keesey J, Rosen M, Schonlau M, et al. Can a chronic care model collaborative reduce heart disease risk in patients with diabetes? J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Feb;22(2):215–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0072-5
  45. Huber CA, Reich O, Früh M, Rosemann T. Effects of Integrated Care on Disease-Related Hospitalisation and Healthcare Costs in Patients with Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Respiratory Illnesses: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study in Switzerland. Int J Integr Care. 2016 Apr;16(1):11. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.2455
  46. Arzttarif Schweiz - Tarif Médical Suisse. https://ats-tms.ch. [Online]
  47. Hostettler S, et al. Grundlagenpapier der DDQ. Ärztliches Wohlbefinden beeinflusst die Behandlungsqualität. Schweiz Ärzteztg. 2012;93(18):18. https://doi.org/10.4414/saez.2012.00481
  48. Lindemann, F. Assessing the mental wellbeing of next generation general practitioners: a cross-sectional survey. BJGP Open. 2019 Oct, 15; 3 (4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101671.
  49. Hanak MA, McDevitt C, Dunham DP. Perceptions of Ambulatory Workflow Changes in an Academic Primary Care Setting. Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2017 Jul/Sep;36(3):261–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/HCM.0000000000000174
  50. Chatterjee S, Davies MJ, Heller S, Speight J, Snoek FJ, Khunti K. Diabetes structured self-management education programmes: a narrative review and current innovations. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018 Feb;6(2):130–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30239-5
  51. Powers MA, Bardsley J, Cypress M, Duker P, Funnell MM, Hess Fischl A, et al. Diabetes Self-management Education and Support in Type 2 Diabetes: A Joint Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Diabetes Care. 2015 Jul;38(7):1372–82. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc15-0730
  52. Lambrinou E, Hansen TB, Beulens JW. Lifestyle factors, self-management and patient empowerment in diabetes care. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019 Dec;26(2_suppl 2S):55–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487319885455
  53. STATA. https://www.stata.com. [Online] [Cited: 02 28, 2022.] https://www.stata.com/support/updates/stata15.html
  54. EpiData. https://www.epidata.dk. [Online] [Cited: 02 28, 2022.] https://www.epidata.dk/download.php
  55. Ravaud P. https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org. [Online] [Cited: 03 02, 2022.] https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/burden-of-treatment-questionnaire

Most read articles by the same author(s)