Implementation and evaluation of a university–hospital partnership program for Type 2 diabetes
Jane Musial
A D , Andrea Cawte A B , Robert Mullins B , Mary Hannan-Jones B and Susan de Jersey A B C
A Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. Email: andrea.cawte@health.qld.gov.au; susan.dejersey@health.qld.gov.au
B School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. Email: robert.mullins@qut.edu.au; m.hannan-jones@qut.edu.au
C Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: jane.musial@health.qld.gov.au
Australian Health Review 46(1) 78-84 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH21173
Submitted: 17 May 2021 Accepted: 30 August 2021 Published: 16 November 2021
Abstract
Objective The aims of this study were to determine whether a university–hospital partnership program for Type 2 diabetes (T2D) would: be well attended; reduce the number of patients on the diabetes out-patient waiting list who have been waiting longer than the recommended; increase discharge from the hospital clinic; increase university health clinic (UHC) occasions of service; be sustainable; and be acceptable to participants.
Method A prospective observational study was conducted between 2016 and 2019. Participants with T2D were referred to a UHC, initially from a hospital diabetes wait list. The final program consisted of 10 weeks: before and after individual assessments, as well as 8 weeks of exercise and education facilitated by health professionals and students. Participant demographic characteristics and data on attendance, discharge and follow-up requirements, the percentage of patients waiting longer than the recommended for a new hospital out-patient appointment, university activity and patient satisfaction were collected.
Results In all, 130 participants commenced the program, 80% completed at least six of eight group sessions and 80% attended the final assessment. The percentage of people waiting longer than recommended decreased from 63% to 16%. The hospital discharged 87% and 59% of participants from the dietitian and endocrinologist respectively. The UHC recorded 2056 occasions of service and 2056 student experiences including dietetics, exercise physiology, psychology, nursing, optometry, social work and podiatry students relating to the program. Satisfaction was high, as measured by the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction, with a mean score of 23.9 from a possible score of 28.0 (n = 93).
Conclusion The partnership resulted in a new model of care for patients with T2D and increased learning experiences for students.
What is known about the topic? Diabetes is the fastest growing disease in Australia, placing unsustainable demands on the health system. Access to patient-centred care and self-management education is essential to optimise glycaemic control, prevent or delay complications and maintain quality of life. The increasing demand of diabetes on the health system affects access to timely care, with unacceptably long wait times reported, resulting in an increase in morbidity and mortality and poor patient satisfaction. A potential solution is the use of clinical students to contribute to service delivery. Student-assisted and student-led health clinics have increased access to care across the globe for many years.
What does the paper add? Although group education has the potential to reduce the burden on clinical service delivery, it was unclear whether a partnership program using students and university and hospital resources would be acceptable to people with T2D and whether this model delivered at a UHC would be sustainable and of benefit to both the health service and university. The results of the evaluation suggest that a university–hospital partnership program is well accepted by participants, well attended, reduces the number of patients waiting for a hospital appointment longer than the acceptable waiting times, increases UHC activity and provides interdisciplinary student experiences. As such, this paper provides evidence that this model of care offers a potential solution to increasing demands for health services for diabetes and student clinical experience.
What are the implications for practitioners? Partnerships between UHCs and hospitals offer a sustainable solution to increasing demand for diabetes services and student training requirements. The description of the development, implementation and evaluation processes can be used by practitioners and educators as a framework for the translation of similar models of care to meet demands in other areas where demand for health services exceeds capacity.
Keywords: group management, implementation, interdisciplinary care, partnership, Type 2 diabetes.
References
[1] Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). National Health Survey: First results, 2017–2018. Canberra: ABS; 2018. Available at: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/national-health-survey-first-results/latest-release [verified 14 August 2020].[2] Diabetes Australia. About Diabetes. Canberra: Diabetes Australia; 2020. Available at: https://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/about-diabetes [verified 14 August 2020].
[3] Zheng Y, Ley S, Hu F. Global aetiology and epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its complications. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2018; 14 88–98.
| Global aetiology and epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its complications.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29219149PubMed |
[4] Internal Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas 9th edn. Brussels: IDF; 2019. Available at: https://www.diabetesatlas.org [verified 14 August 2020].
[5] AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare). Disease expenditure in Australia. Canberra: AIHW; 2019. Available at: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/health-welfare-expenditure/disease-expenditure-australia/contents/summary [verified 14 August 2020].
[6] Davies MJ, D’Alessio D, Fradkin J, Kernan W, Mathieu C, Mingrone G, Rossing P, Tsapas A, Wexler D, Buse J. Management of hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 2018; 41 2669–701.
| Management of hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30291106PubMed |
[7] Stratton IM, Adler A, Neil H, Matthews D, Manley S, Cull C, et al Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ 2000; 321 405–12.
| Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10938048PubMed |
[8] Deakin T, McShane C, Cade J, Williams R. Group base training for self management strategies in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; CD003417
| Group base training for self management strategies in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15846663PubMed |
[9] Odgers-Jewell K, Ball L, Kelly J, Isenring E, Reidlinger D, Thomas R. Effectiveness of group-based self-management education for individuals with Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analyses and meta-regression. Diabet Med 2017; 34 1027–39.
| Effectiveness of group-based self-management education for individuals with Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analyses and meta-regression.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28226200PubMed |
[10] Steinsbekk A, Rygg L, Lisulo M, Rise M, Fretheim A. Group based diabetes self-management education compared to routine treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic review with meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12 213
| Group based diabetes self-management education compared to routine treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic review with meta-analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22824531PubMed |
[11] Colagiuri R, Griggs S, Eigenmann C, Gomez M, Griffiths R. National evidenced based guideline for patient education in Type 2 Diabetes. Canberra: Diabetes Australia and the NHMRC; 2009. Available at: https://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/National-Evidence-Based-Guideline-for-Patient-Education-in-Type-2-Diabetes.pdf[verified August 2020].
[12] Captieux M, Parke H, Epiphaniou E, Wild S, Taylor S, Pinnock H. Supported self-management for people with type 2 diabetes: a meta-review of quantitative systematic reviews. BMJ Open 2018; 8 e024262
| Supported self-management for people with type 2 diabetes: a meta-review of quantitative systematic reviews.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30552277PubMed |
[13] Royal Brisbane Hospital. Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Specialist Outpatient Quarterly Information for Specialist Outpatient. Brisbane: Queensland Health; 2019. Available at: http://www.performance.health.qld.gov.au/Hospital/SpecialistOutpatient[verified August 2020].
[14] Stainkey LA, Seidl I, Johnson A, Tulloch G, Pain T. The challenge of long waiting lists: how we implemented a GP referral system for non-urgent specialist appointments at an Australian public hospital. BMC Health Serv Res 2010; 10 303
| The challenge of long waiting lists: how we implemented a GP referral system for non-urgent specialist appointments at an Australian public hospital.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21050488PubMed |
[15] Davies R. Waiting lists for health care: a necessary evil? CMAJ 1999; 160 1469–70.
| 10352639PubMed |
[16] Bleustein C, Rothschild D, Valant A, Valatis E, Schweitzer L, Jones R. Wait times, patient satisfaction scores, and the perception of care. Am J Manag Care 2014; 20 393–400.
| 25181568PubMed |
[17] Frakes KA, Brownie S, Davies L, Thomas J, Miller ME, Tyack Z. Capricornia Allied Health Partnership (CAHP): a case study of an innovative model of care addressing chronic disease through a regional student-assisted clinic. Aust Health Rev 2014; 38 483–6.
| Capricornia Allied Health Partnership (CAHP): a case study of an innovative model of care addressing chronic disease through a regional student-assisted clinic.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25099212PubMed |
[18] Stuhlmiller CM, Tolchard B. Developing a student-led health and wellbeing clinic in an underserved community: collaborative learning, health outcomes and cost savings. BMC Nurs 2015; 14 32
| Developing a student-led health and wellbeing clinic in an underserved community: collaborative learning, health outcomes and cost savings.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26085815PubMed |
[19] Hawthorne G, Sansoni J, Hayes L, Marosszeky N, Sansoni E. Measuring patient satisfaction with health care treatment using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction measure delivered superior and robust satisfaction estimates. J Clin Epidemiol 2014; 67 527–37.
| Measuring patient satisfaction with health care treatment using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction measure delivered superior and robust satisfaction estimates.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24698296PubMed |
[20] Horigan G, Davies M, Findlay-White F, Chaney D, Coates V. Reasons why patients referred for diabetes education choose not to attend: a systematic review. Diabet Med 2017; 34 14–26.
| Reasons why patients referred for diabetes education choose not to attend: a systematic review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26996982PubMed |
[21] Winkley K, Stahl D, Chamley M, Stopford R, Boughdady M, Thomas S, Amiel S, Forbes A, Ismail K. Low attendance at structured education for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: general practice characteristics and individual patient factors predict uptake. Patient Educ Couns 2016; 99 101–7.
| Low attendance at structured education for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: general practice characteristics and individual patient factors predict uptake.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26319362PubMed |
[22] Winkley K, Evwierhoma C, Amiel S, Lempp H, Ismail K, Forbes A. Patient explanations for non-attendance at structured diabetes education for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study. Diabet Med 2015; 32 120–8.
| Patient explanations for non-attendance at structured diabetes education for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25081181PubMed |
[23] Wadher K. Service review of DESMOND non‐attenders 2010: How attendance of structured group education for type 2 diabetes can be improved. Primary Care Diabetes Society; 2010.
[24] Gucciardi E. A systematic review of attrition from diabetes education services: strategies to improve attrition and retention research. Can J Diabetes 2008; 32 53–65.
| A systematic review of attrition from diabetes education services: strategies to improve attrition and retention research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[25] Schroeder M, Hickey M. Patient satisfaction with diabetes care in a student-run free medical clinic: A quality improvement study. J Pharm Technol 2020; 36 61–7.
| Patient satisfaction with diabetes care in a student-run free medical clinic: A quality improvement study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34752525PubMed |
[26] Prentice J, Fincke B, Miller D, Pizer S. Outpatient wait time and diabetes care quality improvement. Am J Manag Care 2011; 17 e43–54.
| 21473659PubMed |
[27] George L, Bemenderfer S, Cappel M, Goncalves K, Hornstein M, Savage C, et al A model for providing free patient care and integrating student learning and professional development in an interprofessional student-led clinic. J Phys Ther Educ 2017; 31 54–66.
| A model for providing free patient care and integrating student learning and professional development in an interprofessional student-led clinic.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
