Developing a district diabetic register

• Published in: BMJ Vol. 305; no. 6854; pp. 627 - 630
• Main Authors: Burnett, S. D., Woolf, C. M., Yudkin, J. S.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England British Medical Journal Publishing Group 12.09.1992; British Medical Association; BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; BMJ Publishing Group LTD
• Subjects: Catchment Area (Health) - statistics & numerical data; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Data Collection; Diabetes; Diabetes complications; Diabetes Mellitus - drug therapy; Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology; Diabetics; Disease reporting; Diseases; Drug Prescriptions; Education & Debate; England - epidemiology; Ethics committees; Family Practice; General practice; Humans; Identification and classification; Inner cities; Musical register; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital - statistics & numerical data; Prescription drugs; Prevalence; Program Development - economics; Registries; Reporting; Unit costs
• ISSN: 0959-8138; 1468-5833; 1756-1833
• DOI: 10.1136/bmj.305.6854.627

OBJECTIVES--To compile a district wide diabetic register of all diabetic patients registered with general practitioners in the catchment area of a single district general hospital and to compare different approaches to identifying patients. DESIGN--Information for a register was obtained from general practitioners' practice registers, the Prescription Pricing Authority, and hospital diabetic clinic records. SETTING--Catchment area of an inner London district general hospital with a large diabetic clinic. SUBJECTS--All patients with a diagnosis of diabetes resident in or attending general practitioners or hospital clinics in the district or its catchment area. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Prevalence of diabetes, population of patients elicited by different approaches, proportion attending the local district general hospital, cost of using prescription returns for identifying diabetic patients. RESULTS--4674 patients with diabetes were identified from all sources of information, which corresponds to a mean of 22.4 patients per general practitioner and the prevalence of known diabetes of 1.17%. 39.4% of patients identified had Prescription Pricing Authority returns and 42.8% of patients appeared on practices' diabetic registers. Only 56.5% of patients identified attended the district general hospital. For practices where all sources of information were available, practice registers included 60.4% of all patients, and prescription returns and the clinic register identified 64.9% and 40.6% respectively. The cost of using prescription returns to identify patients not detected in other ways was 6.37 pounds per patient. CONCLUSION--The task of developing district diabetic registers may prove, even in one cross sectional attempt, a major task in many inner city health districts.