This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (16)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Quality of Care, Other  • Hypertension  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Richelle J. Koopman, MD; Arch G. Mainous III, PhD; Richard Baker, MD; James M. Gill, MD, MPH; Gregory E. Gilbert, MSPH

Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1357-1361.

Background  Continuity of care has been shown to have a variety of health benefits, but the effect of continuity of care on recognition of common chronic diseases has been underinvestigated.

Objective  To examine the relationship between continuity of care and the recognition of 3 prevalent chronic diseases: diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia.

Methods  We analyzed data from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative sample of 18 162 adult noninstitutionalized residents of the United States collected from 1988 through 1994. We examined the proportion of unrecognized disease among all individuals with diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia according to self-reported level of continuity of care. We used logistic regression to control for possible confounders, including number of disease risk factors.

Results  Among persons with diabetes, in adjusted models, those with a usual provider of care had a lower likelihood of having unrecognized disease (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.95) than those with no usual site or provider of care. Unrecognized hypertension had an unadjusted relationship with level of continuity of care, but continuity of care was not a significant predictor after possible confounders were adjusted for. Unrecognized hypercholesterolemia was not predicted by level of continuity of care.

Conclusions  Continuity of care has some benefits in terms of recognizing chronic disease, although benefits appear to be disease specific. More research needs to be conducted to elucidate the complex relationship between continuity and disease recognition.

From the Department of Family Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (Drs Koopman and Mainous and Mr Gilbert); the Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester, Leicester, England (Dr Baker); and the Department of Family and Community Medicine, Christiana Care Health Services, Wilmington, Del (Dr Gill). The authors have no relevant financial interest in this article.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Consistency of Care and Blood Pressure Control among Elderly African Americans and Whites with Hypertension
Howard et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2009;22:307-315.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effects of Quality on Outcomes in Primary Care: A Review of the Literature
Hsiao and Boult
American Journal of Medical Quality 2008;23:302-310.
ABSTRACT  

The Effect of Care Team Composition on the Quality of HIV Care
Rodriguez et al.
Med Care Res Rev 2008;65:88-113.
ABSTRACT  

UK GPs' and practice nurses' views of continuity of care for patients with type 2 diabetes
Alazri et al.
Fam Pract 2007;24:128-137.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Measuring Continuity of Care in Diabetes Mellitus: An Experience-Based Measure
Gulliford et al.
Ann Fam Med 2006;4:548-555.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Diabetes management in the USA and England: comparative analysis of national surveys
Mainous et al.
JRSM 2006;99:463-469.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

General practitioners may diagnose type 2 diabetes mellitus at an early disease stage in patients they know well
Drivsholm and Olivarius
Fam Pract 2006;23:192-197.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Familiarity breeds neglect? Unanticipated benefits of discontinuous primary care
Broom
Fam Pract 2003;20:503-507.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT