Health outcomes in type 2 diabetes

Outcome evaluation is of great interest throughout the healthcare field, but which outcomes are important depends on the viewpoint one holds. For the healthcare organisation costs and resource utilisation are paramount, whereas patients may be interested in being able to work and lead a productive life without long-term complications. Healthcare policy decisions are influenced by varying degrees of social forces, existing regulations and outcome research findings. Ideally, all three are in agreement but often they may be competitive or may not even be included in policy decision making. With respect to improving outcomes, much energy has been spent on developing diabetes care guidelines. However, these have had minimal impact on physician behaviour. Soon after onset or diagnosis of diabetes, we are most concerned with process measures such as micro-albumin levels, blood pressure monitoring, routine eye and foot examinations and lipid profiles. These process measures are related to the development of intermediate outcomes--proteinuria, retinopathy, foot ulcers and dyslipidaemia. Diabetes is an expensive disease but there is accumulating evidence that improved care can lead to better quality of life and reduction in health care resource utilisation. The UKPDS demonstrated that for one percentage point decrease in HbA1c there was a 35% reduction in the risk of complications. Preliminary data from various diabetes management programmes indicate that instituting standardised care may lead to cost savings and improved health. Rationing health care resources wisely requires consideration of multiple factors including quality of life years (QALYs) and healthy year equivalents (HYEs). Formal quantitative methods are used to measure overall desirability of a medical intervention. Questions to be answered include predictability of responsiveness or adverse events to drug therapy. Outcomes research will have a key role in future development of models of diabetes care.