ArticleFamily medicine and community health2020
Effectiveness of an audit programme for dyslipidaemia management in a primary care setting in Macau: a quality improvement study.
Article in Family medicine and community health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Implementing a Dyslipidemia Management Guideline on Cholesterol Control for Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Heart Disease in Primary Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of an audit programme for dyslipidaemia management in a primary care setting in Macau. Design: A quality improvement study based on an evaluation of a before-after intervention trial was conducted in 2017-2018. Interventions comprising feedback from an audit, general practitioner (GP) training via interactive workshops and one-on-one case discussions were implemented. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with reasonable management of dyslipidaemia, and the secondary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) meeting the target recommended by the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Setting: This study was conducted at the Sao Lourenco Health Center, one of the health centres in the Macau primary care system; this centre provides primary care services to one-tenth of the residents of Macau. Participants: All GPs who worked in the Sao Lourenco Health Center participated in the study. We systematically reviewed 100 patient records from each participating physician's patient list. In total, 1200 and 1100 patient records were reviewed before and after the intervention, respectively. Results: At baseline, 390 (43.5%) patients were eligible for statin therapy, while 411 (47.7%) patients were eligible for statin therapy in the reaudit group (p=0.08). After intervention, the proportion of patients with reasonable management of dyslipidaemia increased from 83.9% to 88.5% (p=0.005), and the proportion of eligible patients with LDL-C levels meeting the target increased from 55.1% to 65% (p=0.004). Conclusions: The audits and feedback significantly improved dyslipidaemia management in the Macau primary care setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.