Effect of a multicomponent quality improvement strategy on sustained achievement of diabetes care goals and macrovascular and microvascular complications in South Asia at 6.5 years follow-up: Post hoc analyses of the CARRS randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes control is poor globally and leads to burdensome microvascular and macrovascular complications. We aimed to assess post hoc between-group differences in sustained risk factor control and macrovascular and microvascular endpoints at 6.5 years in the Center for cArdiovascular Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS) randomized trial. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This parallel group individual randomized clinical trial was performed at 10 outpatient diabetes clinics in India and Pakistan from January 2011 through September 2019. A total of 1,146 patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥8% and systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg and/or LDL-cholesterol ≥130 mg/dL) were randomized to a multicomponent quality improvement (QI) strategy (trained nonphysician care coordinator to facilitate care for patients and clinical decision support system for physicians) or usual care. At 2.5 years, compared to usual care, those receiving the QI strategy were significantly more likely to achieve multiple risk factor control. Six clinics continued, while 4 clinics discontinued implementing the QI strategy for an additional 4-year follow-up (overall median 6.5 years follow-up). In this post hoc analysis, using intention-to-treat, we examined between-group differences in multiple risk factor control (HbA1c <7% plus BP <130/80 mm Hg and/or LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dL) and first macrovascular endpoints (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, death, revascularization [angioplasty or coronary artery bypass graft]), which were co-primary outcomes. We also examined secondary outcomes, namely, single risk factor control, first microvascular endpoints (retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy), and composite first macrovascular plus microvascular events (which also included amputation and all-cause mortality) by treatment group and whether QI strategy implementation was continued over 6.5 years. At 6.5 years, assessment data were available for 854 participants (74.5%; n = 417 [intervention]; n = 437 [usual care]). In terms of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, participants in the intervention and usual care groups were similar and participants at sites that continued were no different to participants at sites that discontinued intervention implementation. Patients in the intervention arm were more likely to exhibit sustained multiple risk factor control than usual care (relative risk: 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45, 2.16), p < 0.001. Cumulatively, there were 233 (40.5%) first microvascular and macrovascular events in intervention and 274 (48.0%) in usual care patients (absolute risk reduction: 7.5% [95% CI: -13.2, -1.7], p = 0.01; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72 [95% CI: 0.61, 0.86]), p < 0.001. Patients in the intervention arm experienced lower incidence of first microvascular endpoints (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.56, 0.83), p < 0.001, but there was no evidence of between-group differences in first macrovascular events. Beneficial effects on microvascular and composite vascular outcomes were observed in sites that continued, but not sites that discontinued the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In urban South Asian clinics, a multicomponent QI strategy led to sustained multiple risk factor control and between-group differences in microvascular, but not macrovascular, endpoints. Between-group reductions in vascular outcomes at 6.5 years were observed only at sites that continued the QI intervention, suggesting that practice change needs to be maintained for better population health of people with diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01212328.

Cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent quality improvement care model for diabetes in South Asia: The CARRS randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent strategy versus usual care in people with type 2 diabetes in South Asia. DESIGN: Economic evaluation from healthcare system and societal perspectives. SETTING: Ten diverse urban clinics in India and Pakistan. PARTICIPANTS: 1146 people with type 2 diabetes (575 in the intervention group and 571 in the usual care group) with mean age of 54.2 years, median diabetes duration: 7 years and mean HbA1c: 9.9% (85 mmol/mol) at baseline. INTERVENTION: Multicomponent strategy comprising decision-supported electronic health records and non-physician care coordinator. Control group received usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per unit achievement in multiple risk factor control (HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) and SBP <130/80 mmHg or LDLc <2.58 mmol/L (100 mg/dL)), ICERs per unit reduction in HbA1c, 5-mmHg unit reductions in systolic BP, 10-unit reductions in LDLc (mg/dl) (considered as clinically relevant) and ICER per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. ICERs were reported in 2020 purchasing power parity-adjusted international dollars (INT$). The probability of ICERs being cost-effective was considered depending on the willingness to pay (WTP) values as a share of GDP per capita for India (Int$ 7041.4) and Pakistan (Int$ 4847.6). RESULTS: Compared to usual care, the annual incremental costs per person for intervention group were Int$ 1061.9 from a health system perspective and Int$ 1093.6 from a societal perspective. The ICER was Int$ 10,874.6 per increase in multiple risk factor control, $2588.1 per one percentage point reduction in the HbA1c, and $1744.6 per 5 unit reduction in SBP (mmHg), and $1271 per 10 unit reduction in LDLc (mg/dl). The ICER per QALY gained was $33,399.6 from a societal perspective. CONCLUSIONS: In a trial setting in South Asia, a multicomponent strategy for diabetes care resulted in better multiple risk factor control at higher costs and may be cost-effective depending on the willingness to pay threshold with substantial uncertainty around cost-effectiveness for QALYs gained in the short term (2.5 years). Future research needs to confirm the long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial intervention for diabetes care in diverse healthcare settings in LMICs.

Effectiveness of a Multicomponent Quality Improvement Strategy to Improve Achievement of Diabetes Care Goals: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Achievement of diabetes care goals is suboptimal globally. Diabetes-focused quality improvement (QI) is effective but remains untested in South Asia. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of a multicomponent QI strategy versus usual care on cardiometabolic profiles in patients with poorly controlled diabetes. DESIGN: Parallel, open-label, pragmatic randomized, controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01212328). SETTING: Diabetes clinics in India and Pakistan. PATIENTS: 1146 patients (575 in the intervention group and 571 in the usual care group) with type 2 diabetes and poor cardiometabolic profiles (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] level ≥8% plus systolic blood pressure [BP] ≥140 mm Hg and/or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDLc] level ≥130 mg/dL). INTERVENTION: Multicomponent QI strategy comprising nonphysician care coordinators and decision-support electronic health records. MEASUREMENTS: Proportions achieving HbA1c level less than 7% plus BP less than 130/80 mm Hg and/or LDLc level less than 100 mg/dL (primary outcome); mean risk factor reductions, health-related quality of life (HRQL), and treatment satisfaction (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Median diabetes duration was 7.0 years; 6.8% and 39.4% of participants had preexisting cardiovascular and microvascular disease, respectively; mean HbA1c level was 9.9%; mean BP was 143.3/81.7 mm Hg; and mean LDLc level was 122.4 mg/dL. Over a median of 28 months, a greater percentage of intervention participants achieved the primary outcome (18.2% vs. 8.1%; relative risk, 2.24 [95% CI, 1.71 to 2.92]). Compared with usual care, intervention participants achieved larger reductions in HbA1c level (-0.50% [CI, -0.69% to -0.32%]), systolic BP (-4.04 mm Hg [CI, -5.85 to -2.22 mm Hg]), diastolic BP (-2.03 mm Hg [CI, -3.00 to -1.05 mm Hg]), and LDLc level (-7.86 mg/dL [CI, -10.90 to -4.81 mg/dL]) and reported higher HRQL and treatment satisfaction. LIMITATION: Findings were confined to urban specialist diabetes clinics. CONCLUSION: Multicomponent QI improves achievement of diabetes care goals, even in resource-challenged clinics. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and UnitedHealth Group.

Rationale and protocol for estimating the economic value of a multicomponent quality improvement strategy for diabetes care in South Asia.

BACKGROUND: Economic dimensions of implementing quality improvement for diabetes care are understudied worldwide. We describe the economic evaluation protocol within a randomised controlled trial that tested a multi-component quality improvement (QI) strategy for individuals with poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes in South Asia. METHODS/DESIGN: This economic evaluation of the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS) randomised trial involved 1146 people with poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes receiving care at 10 diverse diabetes clinics across India and Pakistan. The economic evaluation comprises both a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (mean 2.5 years follow up) and a microsimulation model-based cost-utility analysis (life-time horizon). Effectiveness measures include multiple risk factor control (achieving HbA1c < 7% and blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg and/or LDL-cholesterol< 100 mg/dl), and patient reported outcomes including quality adjusted life years (QALYs) measured by EQ-5D-3 L, hospitalizations, and diabetes related complications at the trial end. Cost measures include direct medical and non-medical costs relevant to outpatient care (consultation fee, medicines, laboratory tests, supplies, food, and escort/accompanying person costs, transport) and inpatient care (hospitalization, transport, and accompanying person costs) of the intervention compared to usual diabetes care. Patient, healthcare system, and societal perspectives will be applied for costing. Both cost and health effects will be discounted at 3% per year for within trial cost-effectiveness analysis over 2.5 years and decision modelling analysis over a lifetime horizon. Outcomes will be reported as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) to achieve multiple risk factor control, avoid diabetes-related complications, or QALYs gained against varying levels of willingness to pay threshold values. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess uncertainties around ICER estimates by varying costs (95% CIs) across public vs. private settings and using conservative estimates of effect size (95% CIs) for multiple risk factor control. Costs will be reported in US$ 2018. DISCUSSION: We hypothesize that the additional upfront costs of delivering the intervention will be counterbalanced by improvements in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, thereby rendering this multi-component QI intervention cost-effective in resource constrained South Asian settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01212328.

Evaluation Series on Safety and Efficacy of Nutritional Supplements in Newly Diagnosed Hyperglycemia: A Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is endemic with developing economies contributing to the bulk of this pandemic. Despite the evidence of incremental benefit of glycemic control starting early in life, acceptance of and adherence to modern medications remain suboptimal. AIMS: To determine the hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)-lowering efficacy and safety of nutritional supplement, PreCrea(®), in adult Indians with newly diagnosed hyperglycemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Double-blind, randomized study conducted in six diabetes centers in India. A total of 193 treatment-naïve subjects with newly diagnosed hyperglycemia and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) >100 mg/dL were randomized into either PreCrea(®) 600 mg (n = 90) or matched placebo (n = 89) capsules twice daily, along with lifestyle modification, for 12 weeks. The main outcomes were changes in HbA1c and FPG levels, attainment of the American Diabetes Association (ADA)-defined goals for HbA1c, and clinical and biochemical measures of safety. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, mean HbA1c in PreCrea(®) group reduced by 0.91% compared with 0.08% increase in the placebo group (P < .001). The reductions in the mean FPG at week 4 (P < .001) and week 12 (P = 0.04) were significant compared to the baseline. ADA goal of HbA1c <7% increased from 15.5% at the baseline to 35.6% at week 12 in PreCrea(®) subjects. Clinical safety and biochemical safety did not change. Hypoglycemia and weight gain were not observed with PreCrea(®). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 1% point reduction in HbA1c at week 12 with PreCrea(®) is comparable with most first-line glucose-lowering drugs. The safety and tolerability of PreCrea(®) highlights its potential as a first-line therapy in newly detected hyperglycemia.