Table 3.
Selected Patient Characteristics, Visit, and Monitoring Adherence, and Results of A1c, SBP, and LDL Cholesterol in 383 Adults with Diabetes, by Sex and Race
| Males n = 225 | Females n = 158 | Black n = 120 | White n = 225 | Total n = 383 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 63.0 (7.9) | 62.7 (8.0) | 64.0 (7.8) | 62.9 (7.8) | 62.8 (7.9) |
| BMI | 30.9 (5.3) | 32.5 (6.0) | 31.6 (5.3) | 32.0 (6.0) | 31.6 (5.6) |
| RUB† | |||||
| Low n (%) | 72 (32.0) | 44 (27.9) | 38 (31.7) | 63 (28.0) | 116 (30.3) |
| Medium n(%) | 77 (34.2) | 52 (32.9) | 40 (33.3) | 75 (33.3) | 129 (33.7) |
| High n (%) | 76 (33.8) | 62 (39.2) | 42 (35.0) | 87 (38.7) | 138 (36.0) |
| N visits | 9.1 (4.0) | 11.4 (5.5)* | 10.7 (5.3) | 9.9 (4.5) | 10.0 (4.8) |
| <2 quarters/year with visits(%) | 11.0 | 7.6 | 5.8 | 9.3 | 9.7 |
| N of quarters monitoring performed: (maximum = 8) | |||||
| A1c | 3.5 (1.7) | 3.7 (1.8) | 3.8 (1.6) | 3.4 (1.7) | 3.6 (1.7) |
| SBP | 5.8 (1.7) | 6.3 (1.7)* | 6.4 (1.6) | 5.9 (1.7)* | 6.0 (1.8) |
| LDL | 2.5 (1.7) | 2.6 (1.7) | 2.6 (1.6) | 2.5 (1.7) | 2.5 (1.7) |
| A1c (%) | |||||
| Baseline (a) | 7.4 (1.6) | 7.7 (1.7) | 8.0 (2.0) | 7.3 (1.4)* | 7.5 (1.7) |
| Last value in 2001 (b) | 7.1 (1.3) | 7.4 (1.5)* | 7.4 (1.5) | 7.1 (1.2) | 7.2 (1.4) |
| Change (b-a) | −0.23 (1.6) | −0.26 (1.3) | −0.57 (1.7) | −0.12 (1.3)* | − 0.24 (1.5) |
| SBP (mmHg) | |||||
| Baseline (a) | 134 (18.7) | 139 (17.8)* | 136 (18.3) | 136 (18.3) | 135.9 (18.5) |
| Last value in 2001 (b) | 133 (17.4) | 138 (20.0)* | 137 (17.6) | 134 (19.0) | 135.0 (18.7) |
| Change (b-a) | − 1.1 (21.0) | − 0.75 (21.4) | +0.55 (20.3) | − 2.2 (21.0) | − 1.0 (21.2) |
| LDL (mg/dl) | |||||
| Baseline (a) | 114 (34.3) | 114 (37.2) | 118 (34.3) | 111 (35.8) | 113.7 (35.5) |
| Last value in 2001 (b) | 101 (28.1) | 106 (35.2) | 106 (33.1) | 101 (28.6) | 103.1 (31.4) |
| Change (b-a) | −13 (33.8) | − 7.1 (34.8) | −12.5 (35.3) | −8.8 (31.4) | −10.7 (34.3) |
*Statistically significant: p < 0.05. Standard deviations and % indicated in parentheses
†RUB comorbidity strata: From claims data, we determined overall burden of co-morbidity, using ICD-9 codes and patient demographics to create resource utilization band (RUB) categories using a formula developed at Johns Hopkins University.16 We then grouped the resultant eight categories into three categories corresponding to low, medium, and high comorbidity