Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Aug 29:4:2333392817721647.
doi: 10.1177/2333392817721647. eCollection 2017 Jan-Dec.

Patient, Provider, and System Factors Associated With Failure to Follow-Up Elevated Glucose Results in Patients Without Diagnosed Diabetes

Michael E Bowen  1   2 , Zahra Merchant  1 , Kazeen Abdullah  1 , Deepa Bhat  1 , Jason Fish  1 , Ethan A Halm  1   2
Affiliations

Patient, Provider, and System Factors Associated With Failure to Follow-Up Elevated Glucose Results in Patients Without Diagnosed Diabetes

Michael E Bowen et al. Health Serv Res Manag Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Background: Although elevated glucose values are strongly associated with undiagnosed diabetes, they are frequently overlooked. Patient, provider, and system factors associated with failure to follow-up elevated glucose values in electronic medical records (EMRs) are not well described.

Methods: We conducted a chart review in a comprehensive EMR with a patient portal and results management features. Established primary care patients with no known diagnosis of diabetes and ≥ 1 glucose value >125 mg/dL were included. Follow-up failure was defined as (1) no documented comment on the glucose value or result communication to the patient within 30 days or (2) no hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ordered within 30 days or resulted within 12 months. Associations were examined using Wilcoxon and χ2 tests.

Results: Of 150 charts reviewed, 97 met inclusion criteria. The median glucose was 133 mg/dL, and 20% of patients had multiple values >125 mg/dL. Only 36% of elevated glucose values were followed up. No associations were observed between patient characteristics, diabetes risk factors, or provider characteristics and follow-up failures. Automated flagging of glucose values ≥140 mg/dL by highlighting them red in the EMR was not associated with improved follow-up (46% vs 32%; P = .19). Even when follow-up occurred (n = 35), only 31% completed gold standard diabetes testing (HbA1c) within 12 months. Of the resulted HbA1c tests (n = 11), 55% were in the prediabetes range (5.7%-6.4%).

Conclusions: Two-thirds of elevated glucose values were not followed up, despite EMR features facilitating results management. Greater understanding of the results management process and improved EMR functionalities to support results management are needed.

Keywords: abnormal test results; diabetes; electronic medical records; random glucose; results management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Similar articles

  • Report of the committee on the classification and diagnostic criteria of diabetes mellitus.
    Committee of the Japan Diabetes Society on the Diagnostic Criteria of Diabetes Mellitus; Seino Y, Nanjo K, Tajima N, Kadowaki T, Kashiwagi A, Araki E, Ito C, Inagaki N, Iwamoto Y, Kasuga M, Hanafusa T, Haneda M, Ueki K. Committee of the Japan Diabetes Society on the Diagnostic Criteria of Diabetes Mellitus, et al. J Diabetes Investig. 2010 Oct 19;1(5):212-28. doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2010.00074.x. J Diabetes Investig. 2010. PMID: 24843435 Free PMC article.
  • Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, Moraleda C, Rogers L, Daniels K, Green P. Crider K, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
  • Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia.
    Richter B, Hemmingsen B, Metzendorf MI, Takwoingi Y. Richter B, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 29;10(10):CD012661. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012661.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 30371961 Free PMC article.
  • Physical and Metabolic Characteristics of Persons With Diabetes and Prediabetes.
    Menke A, Knowler WC, Cowie CC. Menke A, et al. In: Cowie CC, Casagrande SS, Menke A, Cissell MA, Eberhardt MS, Meigs JB, Gregg EW, Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Becker DJ, Brancati FL, Boyko EJ, Herman WH, Howard BV, Narayan KMV, Rewers M, Fradkin JE, editors. Diabetes in America. 3rd edition. Bethesda (MD): National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US); 2018 Aug. CHAPTER 9. In: Cowie CC, Casagrande SS, Menke A, Cissell MA, Eberhardt MS, Meigs JB, Gregg EW, Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Becker DJ, Brancati FL, Boyko EJ, Herman WH, Howard BV, Narayan KMV, Rewers M, Fradkin JE, editors. Diabetes in America. 3rd edition. Bethesda (MD): National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US); 2018 Aug. CHAPTER 9. PMID: 33651536 Free Books & Documents. Review.
  • Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes.
    Genuth SM, Palmer JP, Nathan DM. Genuth SM, et al. In: Cowie CC, Casagrande SS, Menke A, Cissell MA, Eberhardt MS, Meigs JB, Gregg EW, Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Becker DJ, Brancati FL, Boyko EJ, Herman WH, Howard BV, Narayan KMV, Rewers M, Fradkin JE, editors. Diabetes in America. 3rd edition. Bethesda (MD): National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US); 2018 Aug. CHAPTER 1. In: Cowie CC, Casagrande SS, Menke A, Cissell MA, Eberhardt MS, Meigs JB, Gregg EW, Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Becker DJ, Brancati FL, Boyko EJ, Herman WH, Howard BV, Narayan KMV, Rewers M, Fradkin JE, editors. Diabetes in America. 3rd edition. Bethesda (MD): National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US); 2018 Aug. CHAPTER 1. PMID: 33651569 Free Books & Documents. Review.
See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Murphy DR, Reis B, Sittig DF, Singh H. Notifications received by primary care practitioners in electronic health records: a taxonomy and time analysis. Am J Med. 2012;125(2):209, e201–e207. - PubMed
    1. Hickner J, Graham DG, Elder NC, et al. Testing process errors and their harms and consequences reported from family medicine practices: a study of the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(3):194–200. - PubMed
    1. Kwan JL, Cram P. Do not assume that no news is good news: test result management and communication in primary care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015;24(11):664–666. - PubMed
    1. Ealovega MW, Tabaei BP, Brandle M, Burke R, Herman WH. Opportunistic screening for diabetes in routine clinical practice. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(1):9–12. - PubMed
    1. American Diabetes Association. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015;38 suppl:S8–S16. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources