Complex professional interventions improved the process of care , but the effect on patient outcomes remained less clear because such outcomes were rarely assessed .
Organizational interventions that facilitated the structured and regular review of patients also showed a favorable effect on process measures .
Complex interventions in which patient education was added and /or the role of a nurse was enhanced led to improvements in patient outcomes as well as the process of care .
CONCLUSIONS Multifaceted professional interventions and organizational interventions that facilitate structured and regular review of patients were effective in improving the process of care .
The addition of patient education to these interventions and the enhancement of the role of nurses in diabetes care led to improvements in patient outcomes and the process of care
Sharing the care of diabetic patients between hospital and general practitioners: does it work?
A r and omized controlled trial was conducted to compare three forms of diabetes follow-up : ( 1 ) general practitioner care , ( 2 ) a system of care shared between the general practitioner ( GP ) and clinic and ( 3 ) conventional clinic care .  Two hundred and six diabetic patients without significant diabetes-related or other medical complications were r and omized to one of these follow-up systems .  Metabolic control and blood pressure improved significantly and equally in all three groups ( p < 0.05 ) . The shared care group performed as well as or better than either of the other two groups in all other outcome measures . In particular , final attendance rates were 72 % for shared care compared with only 35 % for GP care and 53 % for clinic care . Data collection rates for shared care were comparable with the clinic group for r and om blood glucose ( 88.9 % vs 95.1 % ) , weight ( 93.5 % vs 98.3 % ) , and blood pressure ( 94.8 % vs 92.7 % ) . Only in the case of glycosylated haemoglobin did shared care have poorer data collection ( 66.0 % vs 98.4 % ) . In all these parameters , except blood pressure , shared care out-performed the GP group . We conclude that with adequate support from and communication with hospital-based diabetes services , GPs are capable of providing care appropriate to the needs of uncomplicated diabetic patients
Complex professional interventions improved the process of care , but the effect on patient outcomes remained less clear because such outcomes were rarely assessed .
Organizational interventions that facilitated the structured and regular review of patients also showed a favorable effect on process measures .
Complex interventions in which patient education was added and /or the role of a nurse was enhanced led to improvements in patient outcomes as well as the process of care .
CONCLUSIONS Multifaceted professional interventions and organizational interventions that facilitate structured and regular review of patients were effective in improving the process of care .
The addition of patient education to these interventions and the enhancement of the role of nurses in diabetes care led to improvements in patient outcomes and the process of care