Table 1.
Characteristics of diabetes patients with and without co-morbidity. Data shown as mean or as frequency (%)a
aMeans and average frequency over the 20 imputed datasets.
Table 2.
Proportions of patients who received recommended diabetes care and who achieved recommended clinical outcomes in the year prior to the study and patients’ rating of coordination and integration of diabetes care
1Controlled once in the previous year.
2Adjusted for sex, age, education, ethnicity, diabetes type and diabetes duration.
3Smoking counselling was only reported by smokers: n=72 diabetes patients without co-morbidity, n=131 diabetes patients with co-morbidity, n=14 diabetes patients with concordant co-morbid diseases only, n=105 diabetes patients with discordant co-morbid diseases only and n=47 diabetes patients with concordant and discordant co-morbid diseases. All patients with concordant co-morbid diseases only received smoking counselling; therefore, no odds ratio could be calculated.
4Scores range from 1 to 5, higher scores refer to better coordination of diabetes care.
5Scores range from 1 to 5, higher scores refer to a higher level of integration of diabetes care.
6OR<1 refers to better coordination of care (using ordered multinomial regression).
*p ≤ 0.05.
Annex 1.
Characteristics of diabetes patients without co-morbidity and with different types of co-morbidity. Data shown as mean or as frequency (%)a
aMeans and average frequency over the 20 imputed datasets.
Annex 2.
Perceived coordination of diabetes care by patients without and with different types of co-morbid diseases (%)
1Frequency of responses in category 1–5 of the Dutch National Panel of the Chronically Ill and Disabled (NPCG). Scores range from 1 to 5, higher scores refer to better coordination of diabetes care.