Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research Article

Standards of care of diabetic patients in a typical English community.

N R Dunn and P Bough
British Journal of General Practice 1996; 46 (408): 401-405.
N R Dunn
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P Bough
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Poole has a well-established system of sharing care of patients with diabetes between hospital and general practitioners. Very few comprehensive audits of the effectiveness of such a system, which is being adopted in many areas of the UK, have been carried out. AIM: A study was set up to survey structure, process and outcome of care for as many diabetic patients in the Poole area as possible, and to feed the results back to individual practices. METHOD: Structure criteria were assessed by self-completion questionnaire. Process and outcome criteria were assessed by visits to practices and examination of individual patient notes. A total of 37 practices were visited and the notes of 3974 patients reviewed. Results were analysed by practice and for the district as a whole, and were sent to each practice for comparison. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of diabetes in the area was 1.61%, with a marked preponderance of elderly patients (14.1% were over 80). The overall male to female ratio was 1.2:1. The structure questionnaire pinpointed deficiencies in audit facilities, completeness of diabetic registers, and in general use of optometrists and chiropodists. Process criteria analysis showed that, within the last 13 months, 44% of patients under sole care of a general practitioner had undergone full eye examination, cholesterol levels had been checked in 25%, smoking status in 50%, and some foot inspection had been carried out in 57%. Glycaemic control and blood pressure had been measured in over 75% of patients. Outcome analysis showed, in those patients in which they were measured, mean glycosylated haemoglobin (Hba1c) to be 8.07% (upper limit of normal, ULN = 6.5%), some degree of retinopathy to be present in 17.3%, hypertension in 27%, and hypercholesterolaemia in 33%. CONCLUSION: Standards of care of diabetics by general practitioners in the Poole area are not optimal, although they are as good as those reported for other districts. Glycaemic control was generally poor, especially in those patients needing insulin to control the disease. Vascular disease risk factors need to be targeted, and eye examination systems and chiropody services improved.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 46 (408)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 46, Issue 408
July 1996
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Standards of care of diabetic patients in a typical English community.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Standards of care of diabetic patients in a typical English community.
N R Dunn, P Bough
British Journal of General Practice 1996; 46 (408): 401-405.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Standards of care of diabetic patients in a typical English community.
N R Dunn, P Bough
British Journal of General Practice 1996; 46 (408): 401-405.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Improving the ascertainment of families at high risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective GP register study.
  • Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness.
  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242