These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Who cares for the patient with diabetes? Presentation and follow-up in seven Southampton practices.
    Author: Burrows PJ, Gray PJ, Kinmonth AL, Payton DJ, Walpole GA, Walton RJ, Wilson D, Woodbine G.
    Journal: J R Coll Gen Pract; 1987 Feb; 37(295):65-9. PubMed ID: 3668935.
    Abstract:
    A notes survey was undertaken by a group of eight general practitioners in seven Southampton practices to study the mode of presentation and follow-up of the diabetic patients on the lists of 24 doctors. The 431 known diabetic patients were classified as non-insulin-dependent (67%), insulin-dependent (20%), or, if they had commenced their insulin more than a month after the diagnosis had been made, 'insulin-treated' (13%). This classification allowed characterization of the truly insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent patients.Non-insulin-dependent diabetics were older than insulin-dependent diabetics and had first presented at a greater age. Most patients in each treatment group presented with classical diabetic symptoms, diabetes-related infections, or recognized complications. The majority of these were diagnosed in general practice. However, over half of the asymptomatic non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients had been diagnosed by routine blood or urine testing in hospital. After 1979 fewer non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients were referred to hospital for follow-up at diagnosis than before 1975.Most non-insulin-treated diabetics were followed up in general practice whereas most patients treated with or dependent on insulin were followed up in hospital clinics. Twenty-two per cent of all patients received diabetic care from both their general practitioner and hospital outpatient departments but 20% received no regular diabetic follow-up at all. One year after the initial study, 4% of patients were still without regular review, and 27 more patients had been identified who would have qualified for the original audit.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]