The Impact of Point-of-Care Hemoglobin A1c Testing on Population Health-Based Onsite Testing Adherence: A Primary-Care Quality Improvement Study

Point-of-care glycemia testing in a safety-net dental care setting: A feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of screening at-risk adult dental patients for abnormal blood glucose levels by means of using a chairside finger-stick test that measures glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels.

METHODS

A total of 260 high-risk adult patients, as classified by the American Diabetes Association and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Prediabetes Risk Test, with no history of diabetes received a chairside HbA1c finger-stick test. Descriptive statistics and χ2 and Fisher exact tests were used to examine associations of HbA1c levels with risk scores and study participants' characteristics.

RESULTS

Results of chairside testing indicated that 34.2% had undiagnosed prediabetes and 6.6% had undiagnosed diabetes. Results of the postprocedure questionnaire showed high levels of acceptance and satisfaction with the testing. At 6 months after testing, 64.6% of patients with dysglycemia had consulted their primary care provider for follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental care professionals are in a unique position to collaborate with physicians and other health care providers in the identification of undiagnosed prediabetes and diabetes. Targeted chairside diabetes testing in the oral health care setting for high-risk patients is a viable public health primary preventive measure.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Screening is pivotal for the early detection, prevention, and management of diabetes, and the dental care setting, where chairside testing is a viable strategy, may be an important venue in confronting the diabetes epidemic.

Improving type 2 diabetes detection among at-risk individuals - comparing the effectiveness of active opportunistic screening using spot capillary-HbA1c testing and venous HbA1c testing: a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Delayed diagnosis and treatment of type 2 diabetes increases diabetes-related complications, making the high prevalence of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes in Hong Kong an important concern. Point-of-care capillary HbA1c (POC-cHbA1c) testing holds promise as a comparably accurate, convenient, and timely alternative to venous HbA1c (vHbA1c) for type 2 diabetes screening, yet randomized trials are lacking. This study compared the effectiveness of a 2-step active opportunistic screening strategy using POC-cHbA1c versus usual practice employing vHbA1c and multiple clinic visits in detecting type 2 diabetes among at-risk primary care patients. The primary outcomes were to identify the difference in the proportion of type 2 diabetes detected between intervention (POC-cHbA1c) and control (vHbA1c) groups and the uptake rate of POC-cHbA1c versus vHbA1c testing among consenting participants.

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in 8 General Out-Patient Clinics between June 2022 and January 2024 using 2-step active opportunistic screening. In step 1, risk factor count, 852 at-risk patients were identified through consecutive sampling during their primary care consultation by specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. In step 2, these at-risk patients then underwent POC-cHbA1c (intervention) or vHbA1c (control) testing. If preliminary HbA1c was ≥ 5.6%, a confirmatory oral glucose tolerance test was offered. Randomization occurred at the clinic level using a random allocation sequence generated by statistical software. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were employed to evaluate the effect of the intervention on the uptake rate, adjusting for patient characteristics and clinic clustering.

RESULTS

POC-cHbA1c had a higher uptake rate than vHbA1c (76.0% vs 37.5%; OR = 7.06, 95% CI [2.47-20.18], p < 0.001). A greater proportion of type 2 diabetes (4.2% vs 1.4%; p = 0.016) and pre-diabetes (11.8% vs 6.9%; p = 0.015) were detected using POC-cHbA1c versus vHbA1c. POC-cHbA1c was more likely to detect type 2 diabetes/pre-diabetes combined (OR = 1.99, 95% CI [1.01-3.95], p = 0.048). The number-needed-to-screen to detect one additional type 2 diabetes patient with POC-cHbA1c was 61 versus vHbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

POC-cHbA1c testing was associated with a higher uptake rate and detection of type 2 diabetes versus vHbA1c, underscoring its potential as an effective type 2 diabetes screening strategy in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT06382363 (retrospectively registered: 2024-04-19).

Clinical Need for Point-of-Care Testing for Diabetes in Clinical and Laboratory Improvement Amendments-Waived Settings

Point-of-care testing (POCT) has been used in multiple care settings for acute disease and, to a lesser extent, chronic disease testing. All POCT is regulated under the Clinical and Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA). CLIA-waived POCT requires no proficiency testing and can be carried out by nonlaboratory personnel. This review describes the benefits and limitations of POCT for cardiometabolic diseases and related conditions. It also explores the current U.S. regulatory environment for CLIA-waived POCT, highlighting the need for increased access.

Point-of-care diabetes testing in the dental setting: A national scope of practice survey

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge of state dental directors regarding their state's professional practice act, specifically scope of practice laws regarding point-of-care chairside screening for diabetes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study design was used to examine the 50 state dental directors' knowledge of policy around point-of-care diabetes testing in their state. A five-item survey instrument was designed in a web-based platform and electronically distributed in 2022.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven states (74%) responded to the survey. Regarding whether it was within the scope of practice for dentists to provide chairside point-of-care HbA1c screening, 17 states (46.0%) responded "yes," 5 states (13.5%) responded "no," and 15 states (40.5%) responded "don't know." Of the 17 states who provide diabetes testing, four states (23.5%) reported that dentists were reimbursed, nine states (53.0%) reported they were not reimbursed, and four states (23.5%) reported they did not know regarding reimbursement.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant state heterogeneity with regard to laws, regulations, and reimbursement for chairside diabetes testing in the United States. This is accompanied by vagueness and lack of specificity in the state education laws. For more widespread promotion and adoption of this evidence-based screening, the entire dental community including clinicians, educators, policymakers, payers, and professional organizations at all levels are encouraged to work together to advocate for clarification and specificity in the language of state education laws as well as reimbursement for this vital service.

Evaluation of a pharmacist-led drive-up anticoagulation clinic during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic

Background

The University of Kentucky HealthCare Anticoagulation Clinic at the Gill Heart and Vascular Institute in Lexington, Kentucky, designed and implemented a drive-up clinic for warfarin management with the goal to minimize person-to-person exposure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect on warfarin management in a pharmacist-led anticoagulation service when transitioned from an in-person clinic to a drive-up clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This is a retrospective observational cohort study of 68 patients seen in the University of Kentucky HealthCare Anticoagulation Clinic on warfarin therapy for any indication. Patients were included if they had scheduled visits at least 3 times in the period 6 months before, during, and after the initiation of the drive-up clinic. The primary outcome is the difference in time in therapeutic range (TTR) before and during the drive-up clinic.

Results

The difference between the mean TTR in period 1 (69.1% ± 23.2%) and period 2 (69.6% ± 19.2%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.882). The mean TTR in period 3 (70.5% ± 20.8%) did not differ in statistical significance from either period 1 (P = 0.688) or period 2 (P = 0.746). Safety outcomes including reported bleeding events and emergency department visits or hospital admissions for bleeding or thrombotic events were consistently low across each period.

Conclusion

The results of this study illustrate that a drive-up clinic for warfarin management may be a reasonable alternative approach to providing care for outpatient anticoagulant management and may support nontraditional clinic models for long-term management of anticoagulation and other chronic disease states.

Early experiences with quality-assured HbA1c and professional glucose point-of-care testing in general practice: a cross-sectional observational study among patients, nurses and doctors

Background

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is increasingly used in primary care. The rapid availability of the test result during the patient encounter increases the potential for patients and care providers to make a direct and joint decision on disease management. Our aim was to get insight into the first experiences of patients and healthcare professionals after introducing quality-controlled HbA1c and professional glucose POCT in diabetes care in their own general practices.

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study using paper questionnaires for patients, nurses and general practitioners (GPs) in 13 general practices in the Netherlands. HbA1c and professional glucose POCT was introduced after training and under day-to-day quality control. Patients filled in the questionnaire immediately after the test; nurses and GPs after a minimum period of three months from the starting date. Descriptive data analyses were performed.

Results

A total of 1551 fingerstick blood POC tests were performed (1126 HbA1c; 425 Glucose). For HbA1c POCT, 84 patients, 29 nurses and 11 GPs filled in the questionnaires. For professional glucose POCT, 30 patients, 17 nurses and 8 GPs responded. Response rates varied between 24 and 56%. Patients, nurses and GPs were generally (very) satisfied with the novel POC tests. Patients were most positive about the location (in the GPs’ office) and execution of the POC test (by their own nurse), and the speed of the test result. Almost all nurses indicated to have sufficient knowledge and skills to perform the test. Both nurses and GPs had confidence in the test results and indicated they experienced a higher patient satisfaction than with regular blood tests. Perceived disadvantages were the time required to regularly calibrate the devices and the extension of the consultation time because of the test. Patients, nurses and GPs generally expressed they wanted to continue performing these POC tests in routine diabetes care.

Conclusions

Patients, nurses and GPs expressed (very) positive first experiences after introducing HbA1c and professional glucose testing on two high-quality POCT devices in their own general practices. Further research, with a random selection procedure of practices and patients and in other regions and countries, is recommended to confirm these findings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-022-00969-0.

Utilizing point-of-care A1c to impact outcomes - can we make it happen in primary care?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hemoglobin A1c testing provides a marker of glycemic control and is the standard for diabetes risk assessment. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), only 67.3-71.4% of diabetic patients between 2011 and 2016 had at least two A1c levels tested per year. Moreover, 27.8% had uncontrolled diabetes with an A1c of ≥8.0%, increasing the risk of microvascular complications. Lack of monitoring presents a significant barrier, and improving ease of testing could improve glycemic control.

RECENT FINDINGS

Point-of-care (POC) A1c testing, obtained via capillary blood with results provided in 5-6 min, is available and used frequently in endocrine clinics. However, POC A1c testing is not standard in primary care, where 90% of type 2 diabetes patients are treated. Barriers include access and costs of POC A1c machines and standardization of testing in the primary care setting. Review of literature, however, suggests that POC A1c testing in primary care may lead to A1c reduction whereas being potentially cost-effective and strengths the patient-physician relationship.

SUMMARY

POC A1c testing in primary care, if widely available and integrated into workflow, has the potential to positively impact diabetes care. Real-time feedback may change patient and physician behaviors, allowing earlier therapeutic intensification.

Assessment of Patient Satisfaction with On-Site Point-of-Care Hemoglobin A1c Testing: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Poor glycemic control is a serious challenge in successful diabetes management. Given the low adherence and compliance with HbA1c testing frequency and the corresponding delay in the appropriate medication adjustment, point-of-care testing (POCT) for HbA1c provides an opportunity for better control of diabetes and higher patient satisfaction. The data with this regard are limited in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to assess the level of patient satisfaction associated with the POCT service implementation for HbA1c and evaluate the differences between the number of requested and conducted HbA1c tests before and after POCT implementation and its effect on glycemic control in Saudi clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center ambispective descriptive cohort study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This study had two phases: the retrospective phase (January 2017 to December 2017) and the prospective phase (January 2018 to December 2018). Patient satisfaction was assessed using the patient satisfaction questionnaire short form (PSQ-18) and on-site HbA1c point-of-care testing (HbA1c-POCT) satisfaction questionnaire.

RESULTS

This study included 75 patients with diabetes (37% type 1, 63% type 2) with a mean age of 44.35 (± 17.97) years. The adherence to physician recommendations for HbA1c testing frequency increased from 24% to 85% (before and after POCT implementation, respectively). High levels of satisfaction across seven dimensions of PSQ-18 (77-88%) were reported towards the provided healthcare service after POCT implementation. Furthermore, a high level of agreement on the statements of the on-site HbA1c-POCT satisfaction questionnaire was also observed. Finally, the mean HbA1c level has significantly improved after POCT implementation compared to the traditional HbA1c laboratory testing before POCT implementation [8.34 ± 0.67 and 8.06 ± 0.62, respectively, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

HbA1c testing at POCT improved adherence to recommendations for HbA1c testing frequency for better glycemic control and higher patient satisfaction. POCT reduces turnaround time, improves glycemic control, and facilitates the decision-making process. HbA1c measurement with POC devices is recommended to be implemented in diabetes treatment centers. All of the described benefits of POCT come together to make HbA1c testing the most common procedure for diabetes management at the point of care.