Shared Medical Appointments and Their Effects on Achieving Diabetes Mellitus Goals in a Veteran Population

A unique aspect of the ABJ SMA was the variety of focused sessions offered. Previous studies did not demonstrate such a variety of focused sessions, nor did they evaluate the impact of a focused visit on the patient’s T2DM control. Participation in focused ABJ SMA sessions may have led to improved T2DM control, which may be attributed to the value patients assigned to specialty care and an increased motivation to get healthy.

Related: SGLT2 Inhibitors for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treatment

Another factor that may have led to improved T2DM control was CPS involvement with medication management. The presence of a NP was highly valued, both from a group discussion and medication management standpoint; still, it is a good idea to involve a CPS who has a strong command of DM pharmacotherapy. One shortcoming of this SMA program was the inability for patients to maintain glycemic improvements 6 months after discharge. This pitfall was likely the result of suboptimal coordination of care after SMA discharge and may be avoided by asking the medical administration service clerk to promptly schedule discharged SMA patients for a general medicine clinic T2DM follow-up.The SMA patients had more T2DM interventions within the same time frame compared with the control patients. Although not causative, the increased number of interventions in addition to the bolstered support of the SMA may have correlated with glycemic improvements.

An important finding of this study was the SMA show rate and how it compared with attendance rates found in other group models. The favorable ABJ SMA show rate could have been due to the rigorous attention paid to reminder letters and phone calls. The literature has not established a standard approach to increasing SMA show rates; however, the current data suggest that increased reminders may have increased attendance.

Limitations

This study had several limitations. The external validity was weakened by the modest sample size and the homogenous baseline characteristics of those enrolled. Another limitation was inconsistent documentation of laboratory parameters. The inability to obtain A _1c values exactly at enrollment and discharge could have potentially skewed the results. In addition, incomplete documentation of interventions for dual-care patients (ie, those who obtained care outside of the VA) was an unavoidable challenge. Last, this study did not perform an assessment of SMA patient satisfaction, cost-benefit, or safety.

Conclusion

The ABJ SMA was an effective addition to standards of care in order to achieve improvements in glycemic control in a veteran population with poorly controlled T2DM. Furthermore,the data suggest that a successful program should be multidisciplinary, select poorly controlled patients, offer focused sessions, have a CPS participate in medication management, and encourage patients to complete ≥ 6 sessions. Future studies should be conducted to include more diverse patients to see whether the efficacy of this SMA format is maintained.

A safety analysis should also be conducted to ensure that the SMA format is not only effective, but also a safe means to manage medical conditions. In addition, the scope of the ABJ SMAs should be expanded to allow for evaluation of other diseases. An evaluation of patient satisfaction and cost-benefit could provide additional support for the implementation of SMAs, as improvements in quality of life and cost savings are endpoints to be desired.