Literature search from 1985 to the present was performed using Web-based search engines to identify evidence-based studies of diabetes education.
METHODS
Twelve studies were identified in which a provider characteristic was defined as a discriminate variable associated with impact or efficacy of the education intervention. Provider was defined as all those participating in diabetes care and education (eg, patient, education and care teams, funding and policy agencies). The Certified Diabetes Educator credential also was described.
RESULTS
Specialty or discipline of the provider/care team, technology when used to assist providers, and physician practice patterns have been assessed. There is a paucity of research that assesses provider impact or the specific impact of provider characteristics on diabetes outcomes in a controlled and scientifically rigorous fashion.
CONCLUSIONS
Suggestions for evaluating provider impact based on literature concerning psychotherapy and healthcare education outcomes are: identify provider characteristics/attitudes/skills and link them to outcomes, define therapeutic alliance in diabetes care/ education and assess its contribution to outcomes; and use performance measures as provider characteristics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulindependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329: 977-986.
2.
2. Cypress M, Kistler J. The National Certification Board for Diabetes Educators report on a job analysis and changes in the certified diabetes educator examination. Diabetes Educ. 1999. In press.
3.
3. Santiago JV. Lessons from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes. 1993;42:1549-1554.
4.
4. Mulcahy K. Architects of the diabetes team. Diabetes Educ. 1999;25:161-162.
5.
5. American Diabetes Association. Meeting the Standards. 5th ed.A Manual for Completing the ADA Application for Education Recognition. American Diabetes Association; 1998.
6.
6. American Diabetes Association. Application Manual for the Provider Recognition Program. Alexandria, Va: American Diabetes Association; 1999.
7.
7. American Association of Diabetes Educators. Annual Report. 1997-1998. Chicago: American Association of Diabetes Educators; 1999.
8.
8. Peterson KA, Vinicor F. Strategies to improve diabetes care delivery. J Fam Pract. 1998;47:S55-S62.
9.
9. American Diabetes Association. Tests of glycemia in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1999; 22(suppl 1):S77-S79.
10.
10. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The reliability and validity of a diabetes quality of life instrument developed for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care. 1988;11: 725-732.
11.
11. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. Resource utilization and costs of care in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care. 1995;18:1468-1478.
12.
12. Young-Hyman D, Peyrot M, Jacobson A, Schlundt D, Drotar D. Impact of intensive treatment of diabetes related attitudes and behavior in the DCCT. Diabetes. 1994;43:17A-17A.
13.
13. Ahern J, Grove N, Strand T, et al. Research Group. The impact of the trial coordinator in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Diabetes Educ. 1993;19: 509-512.
14.
14. Delahanty L, Simpkins SW, Camelon K, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The expanded role of the dietitian in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. J Am Diet Assoc. 1993;93:758-767.
15.
15. Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ, Hampson SE. Effects of a brief office-based intervention to facilitate diabetes dietary selfmanagement. Diabetes Care. 1996:19:835-842.
16.
16. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hayward RSA, Pim MA, Horsman J. Patient-specific evidencebased care recommendations for diabetes mellitus: development and initial clinic experience with a computerized decision support system. Int J Med Informatics. 1998;51: 127-135.
17.
17. Tomky DM. Developing a computerized diabetes selfmanagement education module for documenting outcomes. Diabetes Educ. 1999;25: 197-209.
18.
18. ADA Task Force to Revise the National Standards. National standards for diabetes selfmanagement education programs. Diabetes Care. 1995; 18(suppl 1):S94-S96.
19.
19. American Diabetes Association. National standards for diabetes self-management education programs review criteria. Diabetes Care. 1999; 22(suppl 1):S111-S114.
20.
20. Mulrow C, Bailey S, Sonkson PH, Slavin B. Evaluation of an audiovisual diabetes education program: negative results of a randomized trial of patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Gen Intern Med. 1987;2: 215-219.
21.
21. Ahring KK, Ahring JPK, Joyce C, Farid NR. Telephone modem access improves diabetes control in those with insulin-requiring diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1992;15: 971-975.
22.
22. Heller SS, Clarke P, Daly H, et al. Group education for obese patients with type 2 diabetes: greater success at less cost. Diabetes Med. 1988;5: 552-556.
23.
23. Agurs-Collins T, Kumanyika SK, Have TRT, Adams-Campbell LL. A randomized controlled trial of weight reduction and exercises for diabetes management in older African-American subjects. Diabetes Care. 1997;20: 1503-1510.
24.
24. Koproski J, Pretto Z, Poretsky L. Effects of an intervention by a diabetes team in hospitalized patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1997;20: 1553-1555.
25.
25. Litzelman DK, Slemenda CW, Langefeld CC, et al. Reduction of lower extremity clinical abnormalities in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:36-41.
26.
26. Kaplan S, Greenfield S, Ware JE. Assessing the effects of physician-patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease. Med Care. 1989;27: S110-S127.
27.
27. Corkery E, Palmer C, Foley ME, Schechter C, Frisher L, Roman SH. Effect of a bicultural community health worker on completion of diabetes education in a Hispanic population. Diabetes Care. 1997;20:254-257.
28.
28. Fosbury JA, Bosley CM, Ryle A, Sonkson PH, Judd SL. A trial of cognitive analytic therapy in poorly controlled type 1 patients. Diabetes Care. 1997;20: 959-964.
29.
29. Marziali E, Alexander L. The power of the therapeutic relationship. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1991;61:383-390.
30.
30. Safran JD, Wallner LK. The relative predictive validity of two therapeutic alliance measures in cognitive therapy. Psychological Assess. 1991;3:188-195.
31.
31. Salvio M, Beutler LE, Engle D, Wood JM. The strength of therapeutic alliance in three treatments for depression. Psychother Res. 1992;1:31-36.
32.
32. National Certification Board for Diabetes Educators. A national job analysis for the National Certification Board for Diabetes Educators (NCBDE). Chicago: Applied Measurement Professionals; 1997.
33.
33. Lipkin M. Patient education and counseling in the context of modern patientphysician-family communication. Patient Educ Couns. 1996;27:5-11.
34.
34. Litzelman DK, Stratos GA, Marriott MAS, Skeff KM. Factorial validation of a widely disseminated educational framework for evaluating clinical teachers. Academic Med. 1998;73:688-695.
35.
35. Holzemer WL, Reilly CA. Variables, variability, and variations research; implications for medical informatics. J Am Med Informatics Assoc. 1995;2:183-183.
