Low-Intensity Intervention Supports Diabetes Registry Implementation: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in the Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN)

References

1. 1.↵
   Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Comprehensive Primary Care Plus. Available from: https://innovation.cms.gov/initiatives/comprehensive-primary-care-plus/index.html. Updated July 21, 2020.
2. 2.↵
   1. Bruggen RV,
   2. Gorter K,
   3. Stolk R,
   4. Klungel O,
   5. Rutten G

   . Clinical inertia in general practice: widespread and related to the outcome of diabetes care. Fam Pract 2009;26:428–36.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Norris SL,
   2. Nichols PJ,
   3. Caspersen CJ,
   4. et al

   . The effectiveness of disease and case management for people with diabetes. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2002;22:15–38.

   OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Reach G,
   2. Pechtner V,
   3. Gentilella R,
   4. Corcos A,
   5. Ceriello A

   . Clinical inertia and its impact on treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab 2017;43:501–11.

   OpenUrlPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Schmittdiel J,
   2. Uratsu C,
   3. Karter A,
   4. et al

   . Why don't diabetes patients achieve recommended risk factor targets? Poor adherence versus lack of treatment intensification. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23:588–94.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Bodenheimer T,
   2. Wagner E,
   3. Grumbach K

   . Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA 2002;288:1775–9.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Hibbard JH,
   2. Greene J

   . What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013;32:207–14.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Strickland P,
   2. Hudson S,
   3. Piasecki A,
   4. et al

   . Features of the Chronic Care Model (CCM) associated with behavioral counseling and diabetes care in community primary care. J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:295–305.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. McCulloch D,
   2. Price M,
   3. Hindmarsh M,
   4. Wagner E

   . A population-based approach to diabetes management in a primary care setting: early results and lessons learned. Eff Clin Pract 1998;1:12–22.

   OpenUrlPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Nutting P,
    2. Dickinson W,
    3. Dickinson L,
    4. et al

    . Use of chronic care model elements is associated with higher-quality care for diabetes. Ann Fam Med 2007;5:14–20.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Peterson K,
    2. Radosevich D,
    3. O'Connor P,
    4. et al

    . Improving diabetes care in practice: findings from the TRANSLATE trial. Diabetes Care 2008;31:2238–43.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Stroebel R,
    2. Scheitel S,
    3. Fitz J,
    4. et al

    . A randomized trial of three diabetes registry implementation strategies in a community internal medicine practice. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 2002;28:441–50.

    OpenUrlPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Hoque DME,
    2. Kumari V,
    3. Hoque M,
    4. Ruseckaite R,
    5. Romero L,
    6. Evans SM

    . Impact of clinical registries on quality of patient care and clinical outcomes: a systematic review. PLoS One 2017;12:e0183667.

    OpenUrl
14. 14.↵
    1. Balasubramanian B

    . Use of patient registries in U.S. primary care practices. Am Fam Physician 2007;75:1629.

    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Schmittdiel J,
    2. Bodenheimer T,
    3. Solomon NA,
    4. Gillies RR,
    5. Shortell SM

    . Brief report: the prevalence and use of chronic disease registries in physician organizations. A national survey. J Gen Intern Med 2005;20:855–8.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Etz RS,
    2. Keith RE,
    3. Maternick AM,
    4. Stein KL,
    5. et al

    . Supporting Practices to Adopt Registry-Based Care (SPARC): protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci 2015;10:46.

    OpenUrl
17. 17.↵
    Virginia Commonwealth University. Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network. Available from: http://acornpbrn.org/.
18. 18.↵
    Standards of medical care in diabetes—2015: summary of revisions. Diabetes Care 2015;38:S4.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Bonomi A,
    2. Wagner E,
    3. Glasgow R,
    4. VonKorff M

    . Assessment of chronic illness care (ACIC): a practical instrument to measure quality improvement. Health Serv Res 2002;37:791–820.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Kaissi A,
    2. Parchman M

    . Assessing chronic illness care for diabetes in primary care clinics. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2006;32:318–23.

    OpenUrlPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Pilla S,
    2. Segal J,
    3. Maruthur N

    . Primary care provides the majority of outpatient care for patients with diabetes in the US: NAMCS 2009–2015. J Gen Intern Med 2019;34:1089–91.

    OpenUrl
22. 22.↵
    1. Ricci-Cabello I,
    2. Ruiz-Perez I,
    3. Rojas-García A,
    4. Pastor G,
    5. Gonçalves D

    . Improving diabetes care in rural areas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of quality improvement interventions in OECD countries. PLoS One 2013;8:e84464.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
23. 23.↵
    1. Keith R,
    2. Etz R,
    3. Johnson N,
    4. Gonzalez M,
    5. O'Neal J,
    6. Crosson J

    . Barriers and facilitators to implementing a diabetes registry in 14 primary care practices. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: North American Primary Care Research Group Annual Meeting; 2017.