The Vermont Diabetes Information System: A Cluster Randomized Trial of a Population Based Decision Support System

  • Charles D. MacLean
  • Michael Gagnon
  • Peter Callas
  • Benjamin Littenberg
Original Article



Optimal care for patients with diabetes is difficult to achieve in clinical practice.


To evaluate the impact of a registry and decision support system on processes of care, and physiologic control.


Randomized trial with clustering at the practice level, involving 7,412 adults with diabetes in 64 primary care practices in the Northeast.


Provider decision support (reminders for overdue diabetes tests, alerts regarding abnormal results, and quarterly population reports with peer comparisons) and patient decision support (reminders and alerts).


Process and physiologic outcomes were evaluated in all subjects. Functional status was evaluated in a random patient sample via questionnaire. We used multiple logistic regression to quantify the effect, adjusting for clustering and potential confounders. Intervention subjects were significantly more likely to receive guideline-appropriate testing for cholesterol (OR = 1.39; [95%CI 1.07, 1.80] P = 0.012), creatinine (OR = 1.40; [95%CI 1.06, 1.84] P = 0.018), and proteinuria (OR = 1.74; [95%CI 1.13, 1.69] P = 0.012), but not A1C (OR = 1.17; [95% CI 0.80, 1.72] P = 0.43). Rates of control of A1C and LDL cholesterol were similar in the two groups. There were no differences in blood pressure, body mass index, or functional status.


A chronic disease registry and decision support system based on easily obtainable laboratory data was feasible and acceptable to patients and providers. This system improved the process of laboratory monitoring in primary care, but not physiologic control.


diabetes mellitus decision support systems, clinical patient care management chronic disease health services research primary health care human randomized controlled trial adult 


  1. 1.
    Gaede P, Vedel P, Larsen N, Jensen GV, Parving HH, Pedersen O. Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(5):383–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saaddine JB, Cadwell B, Gregg EW, et al. Improvements in diabetes processes of care and intermediate outcomes: United States, 1988–2002. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(7):465–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saydah SH, Fradkin J, Cowie CC. Poor control of risk factors for vascular disease among adults with previously diagnosed diabetes. Jama. 2004;291(3):335–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the chronic care model, Part 2. Jama. 2002;288(15):1909–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. Jama. 2002;288(14):1775–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wagner EH, Glasgow RE, Davis C, et al. Quality improvement in chronic illness care: a collaborative approach. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001;27(2):63–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pearson ML, Wu S, Schaefer J, et al. Assessing the implementation of the chronic care model in quality improvement collaboratives. Health Serv Res. 2005;40(4):978–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grant RW, Cagliero E, Sullivan CM, et al. A controlled trial of population management: diabetes mellitus: putting evidence into practice (DM-PEP). Diabetes Care. 2004;27(10):2299–305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maddigan SL, Majumdar SR, Guirguis LM, et al. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes associated with an intervention to enhance quality of care for rural patients with type 2 diabetes: results of a controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(6):1306–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glasgow RE, Nutting PA, King DK, et al. Randomized effectiveness trial of a computer-assisted intervention to improve diabetes care. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(1):33–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Montori VM, Dinneen SF, Gorman CA, et al. The impact of planned care and a diabetes electronic management system on community-based diabetes care: the Mayo Health System Diabetes Translation Project. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(11):1952–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O'Connor PJ, Desai J, Solberg LI, et al. Randomized trial of quality improvement intervention to improve diabetes care in primary care settings. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(8):1890–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sequist TD, Gandhi TK, Karson AS, et al. A randomized trial of electronic clinical reminders to improve quality of care for diabetes and coronary artery disease. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12(4):431–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Piatt GA, Orchard TJ, Emerson S, et al. Translating the chronic care model into the community: results from a randomized controlled trial of a multifaceted diabetes care intervention. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(4):811–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peterson KA, Radosevich DM, O'Connor PJ, et al. Improving diabetes care in practice: findings from the TRANSLATE trial. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(12):2238–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cleveringa FG, Gorter KJ, van den Donk M, Rutten GE. Combined task delegation, computerized decision support, and feedback improve cardiovascular risk for type 2 diabetic patients: a cluster randomized trial in primary care. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(12):2273–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cherry DK, Hing E, Woodwell DA, Rechtsteiner EA. National ambulatory medical care survey: 2006 summary. Natl Health Stat Report. 2008;(3):1–39.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Rao SR, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care-a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(1):50–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    MacLean CD, Littenberg B, Gagnon M. Diabetes decision support: initial experience with the Vermont diabetes information system. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(4):593–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    MacLean CD, Littenberg B, Gagnon MS, Reardon M, Turner PD, Jordan C. The Vermont Diabetes Information System (VDIS): study design and subject recruitment for a cluster randomized trial of a decision support system in a regional sample of primary care practices. Clinical Trials. 2004;1:532–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Littenberg B, Maclean CD. Passive consent for clinical research in the age of HIPAA. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(3):207–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Donner A, Birkett N, Buck C. Randomization by cluster. Sample size requirements and analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 1981;114(6):906–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Donner A, Klar N. Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomization trials. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(3):416–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Koepsell TD, Wagner EH, Cheadle AD, et al. Selected methodological issues in evaluating community-based health promotion and disease prevention programs. Annu Rev Publ Health. 1992;13:31–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Littenberg B, Maclean CD. Intra-cluster correlation coefficients in adults with diabetes in primary care practices: the Vermont Diabetes Information System Field Survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(1):20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    ADA. Standards of medical care in diabetes-2006. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(Suppl 1):S4–42.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Turner-Bowker DM, Gandek B. How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12 Health Survey. Lincoln: QualityMetric Inc.; 2003.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(7):943–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nurss J. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;38(1):33–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sangha O, Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The self-administered comorbidity questionnaire: a new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49(2):156–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bradley C, Todd C, Gorton T, Symonds E, Martin A, Plowright R. The development of an individualized questionnaire measure of perceived impact of diabetes on quality of life: the ADDQoL. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(1–2):79–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ritter PL, Stewart AL, Kaymaz H, Sobel DS, Block DA, Lorig KR. Self-reports of health care utilization compared to provider records. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54(2):136–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Machlin CR, Carper K. Expenses for a hospital emergency room visit, 2003. AHRQ statistical brief #111. Accessed September 29, 2009.
  34. 34.
    Machlin CR, Carper K. Expenses for office-based physician visits by specialty, 2004. Accessed September 29, 2009.
  35. 35.
    Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. 2005 Hospital Inpatient Stays, 2007. (October 2007). Accessed September 29, 2009.
  36. 36.
    Brown H, Prescott R. Applied mixed models in medicine. 2nd ed. Chichester, England; Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley; 2006.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Murray DM. Design and analysis of group-randomized trials. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Piantadosi S. Clinical Trials: A Methodologic Perspective. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1997.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Royston P. Multiple imputation of missing values: update. Stata Journal. 2005;5(2):188–201.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ambler G, Omar RZ, Royston P. A comparison of imputation techniques for handling missing predictor values in a risk model with a binary outcome. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007;16(3):277–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Calle EE, Terrell DD. Utility of the National Death Index for ascertainment of mortality among cancer prevention study II participants. Am J Epidemiol. 1993;137(2):235–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lash TL, Silliman RA. A comparison of the National Death Index and Social Security Administration databases to ascertain vital status. Epidemiology. 2001;12(2):259–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    US Census. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States:2003. Accessed September 29, 2009.
  44. 44.
    US Census. Health Insurance Coverage Status and Type of Coverage by State and Age for All People:2004. Accessed September 29, 2009.
  45. 45.
    Renders CM, Valk GD, Griffin S, Wagner EH, Eijk JT, Assendelft WJ. Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(1):CD001481.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shojania KG, Ranji SR, McDonald KM, et al. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. Jama. 2006;296(4):427–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    O'Conner PJ, Sperl-Hillen J, Johnson PE, Rush WA, Crain AL. Customized feedback to patients and providers failed to improve safety or quality of diabetes care: a randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1158–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li Z, Epstein AM. Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice. Jama. 2005;294(14):1788–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Phillips LS, Branch WT, Cook CB, et al. Clinical inertia. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(9):825–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Parchman ML, Pugh JA, Romero RL, Bowers KW. Competing demands or clinical inertia: the case of elevated glycosylated hemoglobin. Ann Fam Med. 2007;5(3):196–201.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gary TL, Genkinger JM, Guallar E, Peyrot M, Brancati FL. Meta-analysis of randomized educational and behavioral interventions in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2003;29(3):488–501.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Krein SL, Klamerus ML, Vijan S, et al. Case management for patients with poorly controlled diabetes: a randomized trial. Am J Med. 2004;116(11):732–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet AM. A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(10):953–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bodenheimer T. Coordinating care-a perilous journey through the health care system. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(10):1064–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, American Osteopathic Association. Joint Principles of the Patient-Centered Medical Home. March 2007. Accessed September 29, 2009.
  56. 56.
    Batalden PB, Godfrey MM, Nelson EC. Quality by Design: A Clinical Microsystems Approach1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2007.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    MacLean CD, Littenberg B. Patient assignment in a diabetes decision support system: implications for population management and pay for performance. Society of General Internal Medicine. Pittsburgh; 2008.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Littenberg B, MacLean CD, Zygarowski K, Drapola BH, Duncan JA, Frank CR. The Vermedx Diabetes Information System reduces healthcare utilization. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15(3):166–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles D. MacLean
    • 1
  • Michael Gagnon
    • 2
  • Peter Callas
    • 3
  • Benjamin Littenberg
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of General Internal MedicineUniversity of Vermont College of MedicineBurlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Information ServicesFletcher Allen Health CareBurlingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiometryUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  4. 4.Department of NursingUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations