Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 22, Issue 12, pp 1635–1640 | Cite as

Beyond Comorbidity Counts: How Do Comorbidity Type and Severity Influence Diabetes Patients’ Treatment Priorities and Self-Management?

  • Eve A. Kerr
  • Michele Heisler
  • Sarah L. Krein
  • Mohammed Kabeto
  • Kenneth M. Langa
  • David Weir
  • John D. Piette
Original Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The majority of older adults have 2 or more chronic conditions and among patients with diabetes, 40% have at least three.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand how the number, type, and severity of comorbidities influence diabetes patients’ self-management and treatment priorities.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observation study.

PATIENTS

A total of 1,901 diabetes patients who responded to the 2003 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) diabetes survey.

MEASUREMENTS

We constructed multivariate models to assess the association between presence of comorbidities and each of 2 self-reported outcomes, diabetes prioritization and self-management ability, controlling for patient demographics. Comorbidity was characterized first by a count of all comorbid conditions, then by the presence of specific comorbidity subtypes (microvascular, macrovascular, and non-diabetes related), and finally by severity of 1 serious comorbidity: heart failure (HF).

RESULTS

40% of respondents had at least 1 microvascular comorbidity, 79% at least 1 macrovascular comorbidity, and 61% at least 1 non-diabetes-related comorbidity. Patients with a greater overall number of comorbidities placed lower priority on diabetes and had worse diabetes self-management ability scores. However, only macrovascular and non-diabetes-related comorbidities, but not microvascular comorbidities, were associated with lower diabetes prioritization, whereas higher numbers of microvascular, macrovascular, and non-diabetes-related conditions were all associated with lower diabetes self-management ability scores. Severe, but not mild, HF was associated with lower diabetes prioritization and self-management scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The type and severity of comorbid conditions, and not just the comorbidity count, influence diabetes patients’ self-management. Patients with severely symptomatic comorbidities and those with conditions they consider to be unrelated to diabetes may need additional support in making decisions about care priorities and self-management activities.

KEY WORDS

comorbidity discordant conditions diabetes mellitus self-management 

References

  1. 1.
    Wolff JL, Starfield B, Anderson G. Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly. Arch Intern Med 2002;162(20):2269–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Russell LB, Suh DC, Safford MA. Time requirements for diabetes self-management: too much for many? J Fam Pract 2005;54(1):52–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Druss BG, Marcus SC, Olfson M, Tanielian T, Elinson L, Pincus HA. Comparing the national economic burden of five chronic conditions. Health Aff 2001;20(6):233–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST Jr, Agostini JV. Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. New Engl J Med 2004;351(27):2870–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA 2005;294(6):716–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glasgow R, Toobert DJ, Gilette CD. Psychosocial barriers to diabetes self-management and quality of life. Diabetes Spectr 2001;14:33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glasgow RE, Hampson SE, Strycker LA, Ruggiero L. Personal-model beliefs and social-environmental barriers related to diabetes self-management. Diabetes Care 1997;20(4):556–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heisler M, Bouknight RR, Hayward RA, Smith DM, Kerr EA. Diabetes self-management: the relative importance of physician communication, participatory decision-making and patient understanding. J Gen Intern Med 2002;17(4):243–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heisler M, Smith DM, Hayward RA, Krein SL, Kerr EA. How well do patients’ assessments of their diabetes self-management correlate with actual glycemic control and receipt of recommended diabetes services? Diabetes Care 2003;26(3):738–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bayliss EA, Steiner JF, Fernald DH, Crane LA, Main DS. Descriptions of barriers to self-care by persons with comorbid chronic diseases. Ann Fam Med 2003;1(1):15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Piette JD, Kerr EA. The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on diabetes care. Diabetes Care 2006;29(3):725–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cramer JA. A systematic review of adherence with medications for diabetes. Diabetes Care 2004;27(5):1218–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DiMatteo MR. Variations in patients’ adherence to medical recommendations: a quantitative review of 50 years of research. Med Care 2004;42(3):200–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rubin RR. Adherence to pharmacologic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Med 2005;118 Suppl 5A:27S–34S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, Epstein RS. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care 2005;43(6):521–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MI: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krein SL, Heisler M, Piette JD, Makki F, Kerr EA. The effect of chronic pain on diabetes patients’ self-management. Diabetes Care 2005;28(1):65–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schoenberg NE, Drungle SC. Barriers to non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) self-care practices among older women. J Aging Health 2001;13(4):443–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jaen CR, Stange KC, Nutting PA. Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services. J Fam Pract 1994;38(2):166–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chernof BA, Sherman SE, Lanto AB, Lee ML, Yano EM, Rubenstein LV. Health habit counseling amidst competing demands: effects of patient health habits and visit characteristics. Med Care 1999;37(8):738–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45(6):613–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40(5):373–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Redelmeier DA, Tan SH, Booth GL. The treatment of unrelated disorders in patients with chronic medical diseases. New Engl J Med 1998;338(21):1516–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Juster FT, Suzman R. SR. An overview of the health retirement study. J Hum Resour 1995;30:S7–S56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action. A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1986.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in physiological activation in health-promoting behavior. In: Madden J, Matthysse S, Barchas J, eds. Adaptation, Learning, and Affect. New York: Raven Press; 1991, 226–69.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Williams GC, Freedman ZR, Deci EL. Supporting autonomy to motivate patients with diabetes for glucose control. Diabetes Care 1998;21(10):1644–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ciechanowski PS, Katon WJ, Russo JE. Depression and diabetes: impact of depressive symptoms on adherence, function, and costs. Arch Intern Med 2000;160(21):3278–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dixon LB, Kreyenbuhl JA, Dickerson FB, et al. A comparison of type 2 diabetes outcomes among persons with and without severe mental illnesses. Psychiatr Serv 2004;55(8):892–900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rigler SK, Studenski S, Wallace D, Reker DM, Duncan PW. Co-morbidity adjustment for functional outcomes in community-dwelling older adults. Clin Rehabil 2002;16(4):420–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vijan S, Hayward RA. Treatment of hypertension in type 2 diabetes mellitus: blood pressure goals, choice of agents, and setting priorities in diabetes care. Ann Intern Med 2003;138(7):593–602.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hofer TP, Zemencuk JK, Hayward RA. When there is too much to do: how practicing physicians prioritize among recommended interventions. J Gen Intern Med 2004;19(6):646–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fisher G, Faul J, Weir DR, Wallace RB. HRS/AHEAD documentation report: documentation of chronic disease measures in the health and retirement study.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Granata AV, Hillman AL. Competing practice guidelines: using cost-effectiveness analysis to make optimal decisions. Ann Intern Med 1998;128(1):56–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    American College of Physicians. The Advanced Medical Home: A Patient-Centered, Physician-Guided Model of Health Care. A Policy Monograph, 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eve A. Kerr
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michele Heisler
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sarah L. Krein
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mohammed Kabeto
    • 2
  • Kenneth M. Langa
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • David Weir
    • 3
  • John D. Piette
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.VA HSR&D Center of ExcellenceVA Ann Arbor Health Care SystemAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.University of Michigan Institute for Social ResearchAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations