Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Diabetes Complications. 2014 Oct 13;29(2):288–294. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2014.10.003

Table 3.

Impact of Concordant and Discordant Conditions on Diabetes Testing Goal Achievement (n=23,430)

Diabetes Testing Goal Achieved

HbA1c Testing
LDL Cholesterol Testing
Kidney Testing
All Testing
(HbA1c, LDL, Kidney)
Number of Comorbid
Conditions
OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value
Concordant comorbid
conditions
 0-1 -- -- -- --
 2-3 1.4 (1.3-1.5) <0.001* 2.0 (1.8-2.2) <0.001* 1.4 (1.3-1.5) <0.001* 1.5 (1.4-1.6) <0.001*
 4+ 1.8 (1.6-2.1) <0.001* 2.4 (2.1-2.8) <0.001* 3.0 (2.6-3.4) <0.001* 2.1 (1.9-2.3) <0.001*
Discordant comorbid
conditions
 0-1 -- -- -- --
 2-3 1.1 (1.1-1.2) 0.001* 0.97 (0.88-1.1) 0.519 1.0 (0.95-1.1) 0.539 1.1 (0.99-1.1) 0.082
 4+ 1.3 (1.1-1.4) <0.001* 0.86 (0.75-0.99) 0.033* 1.0 (0.88-1.1) 0.911 1.1 (0.96-1.2) 0.272

Adjusted for age, sex, race, insurance, having Medicaid ever, number of face-to-face office visits in the baseline year, patient rural-urban commuting area, percent with diabetes in patient's county, percent with diabetes in patient's county who achieved HbA1c testing, percent below poverty line in patient's zip code, percent without high school education in patient's zip code, health system

*

p value < 0.05