Abstract

Interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP), the collaboration of health workers from different professional backgrounds with patients, families, caregivers, and communities, is central to optimal primary care. However, limited evidence exists regarding its association with patient outcomes. To examine the association of ICP with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels among adults receiving primary care. A literature search of English language journals (January 2013-2018; updated through March 2020) was conducted using MEDLINE; Embase; Ovid IPA; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials: Issue 2 of 12, February 2018; NHS Economic Evaluation Database: Issue 2 of 4, April 2015; Clarivate Analytics WOS Science Citation Index Expanded (1990-2018); EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus With Full Text (1937-2018); Elsevier Scopus; FirstSearch OAIster; AHRQ PCMH Citations Collection; ClinicalTrials.gov; and HSRProj. Studies needed to evaluate the association of ICP (≥3 professions) with HbA1c, SBP, or DBP levels in adults with diabetes and/or hypertension receiving primary care. A dual review was performed for screening and selection. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guideline for data abstractions and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations for bias assessment. Two dual review teams conducted independent data extraction with consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model for meta-analyses and forest plots constructed to report standardized mean differences (SMDs). For high heterogeneity (I2), data were stratified by baseline level and by study design. The primary outcomes included HbA1c, SBP, and DBP levels as determined before data collection. A total of 3543 titles or abstracts were screened; 170 abstracts or full texts were reviewed. Of 50 articles in the systematic review, 39 (15 randomized clinical trials [RCTs], 24 non-RCTs) were included in the meta-analyses of HbA1c (n = 34), SBP (n = 25), and DBP (n = 24). The sample size ranged from 40 to 20 524, and mean age ranged from 51 to 70 years, with 0% to 100% participants being male. Varied ICP features were reported. The SMD varied by baseline HbA1c, although all SMDs significantly favored ICP (HbA1c <8, SMD = -0.13; P < .001; HbA1c ≥8 to < 9, SMD = -0.24; P = .007; and HbA1c ≥9, SMD = -0.60; P < .001). The SMD for SBP and DBP were -0.31 (95% CI, -0.46 to -0.17); P < .001 and -0.28 (95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14); P < .001, respectively, with effect sizes not associated with baseline levels. Overall I2 was greater than 80% for all outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ICP was associated with reductions in HbA1c regardless of baseline levels as well as with reduced SBP and DBP. However, the greatest reductions were found with HbA1c levels of 9 or higher. The implementation of ICP in primary care may be associated with improvements in patient outcomes in diabetes and hypertension.

Highlights

  • The standardized mean differences (SMDs) varied by baseline hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), all SMDs significantly favored interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP) (HbA1c

  • Primary care ICP was associated with reductions in HbA1c regardless of baseline levels, but the greatest reductions were found with HbA1c levels of 9 or higher

  • This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ICP was associated with reductions in HbA1c regardless of baseline levels as well as with reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Given the complexity of diabetes and hypertension management, team-based care with physicians, nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, and other health care professionals can be an effective approach.. ICP is recognized as a central component of providing optimal primary care, to our knowledge, there is limited evidence of its role in patient-oriented health outcomes. Two systematic reviews reported conflicting results for ICP in patients with diabetes.. One systematic review of 8 studies showed a nonsignificant reduction in hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) when comparing team-based care with usual care.. Another review of 7 trials found that team-based care was associated with improved HbA1c levels compared with controls.. A 2019 systematic review and meta-analysis of 35 studies reported that, compared with usual care, team-based care was associated with improved HbA1c, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels.. Two systematic reviews reported conflicting results for ICP in patients with diabetes. One systematic review of 8 studies showed a nonsignificant reduction in hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) when comparing team-based care with usual care. In contrast, another review of 7 trials found that team-based care was associated with improved HbA1c levels compared with controls. A 2019 systematic review and meta-analysis of 35 studies reported that, compared with usual care, team-based care was associated with improved HbA1c, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels. This study included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) only up to 2015 and was not focused on assessing ICP by at least 3 professions in primary care settings

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call