Next Article in Journal
Housing and Health of Kiribati Migrants Living in New Zealand
Previous Article in Journal
Physiological and Perceptual Responses to Nordic Walking in a Natural Mountain Environment
Article Menu
Issue 10 (October) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14(10), 1236; doi:10.3390/ijerph14101236

Comparison of Two Sources of Clinical Audit Data to Assess the Delivery of Diabetes Care in Aboriginal Communities

1
School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
2
The Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW 2305, Australia
3
Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia
4
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia
5
National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 5 September 2017 / Revised: 10 October 2017 / Accepted: 12 October 2017 / Published: 17 October 2017
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [243 KB, uploaded 17 October 2017]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the concordance between data extracted from two Clinical Decision Support Systems regarding diabetes testing and monitoring at Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services in Australia. De-identified PenCAT and Communicare Systems data were extracted from the services allocated to the intervention arm of a diabetes care trial, and intra-class correlations for each extracted item were derived at a service level. Strong to very strong correlations between the two data sources were found regarding the total number of patients with diabetes per service (Intra-class correlation [ICC] = 0.99), as well as the number (ICC = 0.98–0.99) and proportion (ICC = 0.96) of patients with diabetes by gender. The correlation was moderate for the number and proportion of Type 2 diabetes patients per service in the group aged 18–34 years (ICC = 0.65 and 0.8–0.82 respectively). Strong to very strong correlations were found for numbers and proportions of patients being tested for diabetes, and for appropriate monitoring of patients known to have diabetes (ICC = 0.998–1.00). This indicated a generally high degree of concordance between whole-service data extracted by the two Clinical Decision Support Systems. Therefore, the less expensive or less complex option (depending on the individual circumstances of the service) may be appropriate for monitoring diabetes testing and care. However, the extraction of data about subgroups of patients may not be interchangeable. View Full-Text
Keywords: decision support systems; clinical; community health services; information storage and retrieval; testing and monitoring decision support systems; clinical; community health services; information storage and retrieval; testing and monitoring
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Regan, T.; Paul, C.; Ishiguchi, P.; D’Este, C.; Koller, C.; Forshaw, K.; Noble, N.; Oldmeadow, C.; Bisquera, A.; Eades, S. Comparison of Two Sources of Clinical Audit Data to Assess the Delivery of Diabetes Care in Aboriginal Communities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1236.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top