Gayle E. Reiber

Bio: Gayle E. Reiber is an academic researcher from University of Washington. The author has contributed to research in topics: Veterans Affairs & Population. The author has an hindex of 47, co-authored 156 publications receiving 11985 citations. Previous affiliations of Gayle E. Reiber include Veterans Health Administration & United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

Pathways to Diabetic Limb Amputation: Basis for Prevention

Abstract: We defined the causal pathways responsible for 80 consecutive initial lower-extremity amputations to an extremity in diabetic patients at the Seattle Veterans Affairs Medical Center over a 30-mo interval from 1984 to 1987. Causal pathways, either unitary or composed of various combinations of seven potential causes (i.e., ischemia, infection, neuropathy, faulty wound healing, minor trauma, cutaneous ulceration, gangrene), were determined empirically after a synthesis by the investigators of various objective and subjective data. Estimates of the proportion of amputations that could be ascribed to each component cause were calculated. Twenty-three unique causal pathways to diabetic limb amputation were identified. Eight frequent constellations of component causes resulted in 73% of the amputations. Most pathways were composed of multiple causes, with only critical ischemia from acute arterial occlusions responsible for amputations as a singular cause. The causal sequence of minor trauma, cutaneous ulceration, and wound-healing failure applied to 72% of the amputations, often with the additional association of infection and gangrene. We specified precise criteria in the definition of causal pathway to permit estimation of the cumulative proportion of amputations due to various causes. Forty-six percent of the amputations were attributed to ischemia, 59% to infection, 61% to neuropathy, 81% to faulty wound healing, 84% to ulceration, 55% to gangrene, and 81% to initial minor trauma. An identifiable and potentially preventable pivotal event, in most cases an episode involving minor trauma that caused cutaneous injury, preceded 69 to 80 amputations. Defining causal pathways that predispose to diabetic limb amputation suggests practical interventions that may be effective in preventing diabetic limb loss.

Incidence, outcomes, and cost of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of foot ulcers in a large cohort of patients with diabetes, the risk of developing serious complications after diagnosis, and the attributable cost of care compared with that in patients without foot ulcers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with diabetes in a large staff-model health maintenance organization from 1993 to 1995. Patients with diabetes were identified by algorithm using administrative, laboratory, and pharmacy records. The data were used to calculate incidence of foot ulcers, risk of osteomyelitis, amputation, and death after diagnosis of foot ulcer, and attributable costs in foot ulcer patients compared with patients without foot ulcers. RESULTS: Among 8,905 patients identified with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, 514 developed a foot ulcer over 3 years of observation (cumulative incidence 5.8%). On or after the time of diagnosis, 77 (15%) patients developed osteomyelitis and 80 (15.6%) required amputation. Survival at 3 years was 72% for the foot ulcer patients versus 87% for a group of age- and sex-matched diabetic patients without foot ulcers (P

Causal pathways for incident lower-extremity ulcers in patients with diabetes from two settings.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and constellations of anatomic, pathophysiologic, and environmental factors involved in the development of incident diabetic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes and no history of foot ulcers from Manchester, U.K., and Seattle, Washington, research settings. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Rothman model of causation was applied to the diabetic foot ulcer condition. The presence of structural deformities, peripheral neuropathy, ischemia, infection, edema, and callus formation was determined for diabetic individuals with incident foot ulcers in Manchester and Seattle. Demographic, health, diabetes, and ulcer data were ascertained for each patient. A multidisciplinary group of foot specialists blinded to patient identity independently reviewed detailed abstracts to determine component and sufficient causes present and contributing to the development of each patient9s foot ulcer. A modified Delphi process assisted the group in reaching consensus on component causes for each patient. Estimates of the proportion of ulcers that could be ascribed to each component cause were computed. RESULTS: From among 92 study patients from Manchester and 56 from Seattle, 32 unique causal pathways were identified. A critical triad (neuropathy, minor foot trauma, foot deformity) was present in > 63% of patient9s causal pathways to foot ulcers. The components edema and ischemia contributed to the development of 37 and 35% of foot ulcers, respectively. Callus formation was associated with ulcer development in 30% of the pathways. Two unitary causes of ulcer were identified, with trauma and edema accounting for 6 and

Preventive Foot Care in People With Diabetes

Abstract: A number of effective, low-cost strategies are available to identify and treat the person at risk for diabetic foot ulcers and lower-extremity amputation. These strategies must be more widely adopted by all diabetic care providers to maintain the integrity and function of the lower limb, and thus improve the quality of life for people with diabetes.

Diet and Exercise Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III)

Abstract: OBJECTIVE —To describe diet and exercise practices from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS —We analyzed data from 1,480 adults older than 17 years with a self-reported diagnosis of type 2 diabetes in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III). Fruit and vegetable consumption was obtained from a food frequency questionnaire; the percentages of total calories from fat and saturated fat were obtained from a 24-h food recall. Physical activity was based on self report during the month before the survey. RESULTS —Of individuals with type 2 diabetes, 31% reported no regular physical activity and another 38% reported less than recommended levels of physical activity. Sixty-two percent of respondents ate fewer than five servings of fruits and vegetables per day. Almost two thirds of the respondents consumed >30% of their daily calories from fat and >10% of total calories from saturated fat. Mexican Americans and individuals over the age of 65 years ate a higher number of fruits and vegetables and a lower percentage of total calories from fat. Lower income and increasing age were associated with physical inactivity. Thirty-six percent of the sample were overweight and another 46% were obese. CONCLUSIONS —The majority of individuals with type 2 diabetes were overweight, did not engage in recommended levels of physical activity, and did not follow dietary guidelines for fat and fruit and vegetable consumption. Additional measures are needed to encourage regular physical activity and improve dietary habits in this population.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

Abstract: Background Audit and feedback continues to be widely used as a strategy to improve professional practice. It appears logical that healthcare professionals would be prompted to modify their practice if given feedback that their clinical practice was inconsistent with that of their peers or accepted guidelines. Yet, audit and feedback has not been found to be consistently effective. Objectives To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient outcomes. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group's register up to January 2001. This was supplemented with searches of MEDLINE and reference lists, which did not yield additional relevant studies. Selection criteria Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) that reported objectively measured professional practice in a healthcare setting or healthcare outcomes. Data collection and analysis Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Quantitative (meta-regression), visual and qualitative analyses were undertaken. Main results We included 85 studies, 48 of which have been added to the previous version of this review. There were 52 comparisons of dichotomous outcomes from 47 trials with over 3500 health professionals that compared audit and feedback to no intervention. The adjusted RDs of non-compliance with desired practice varied from 0.09 (a 9% absolute increase in non-compliance) to 0.71 (a 71% decrease in non-compliance) (median = 0.07, inter-quartile range = 0.02 to 0.11). The one factor that appeared to predict the effectiveness of audit and feedback across studies was baseline non-compliance with recommended practice. Reviewer's conclusions Audit and feedback can be effective in improving professional practice. When it is effective, the effects are generally small to moderate. The absolute effects of audit and feedback are more likely to be larger when baseline adherence to recommended practice is low.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2012

Abstract: D iabetes mellitus is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and ongoing patient self-management education and support to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payers, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. Specifically titled sections of the standards address children with diabetes, pregnant women, and people with prediabetes. These standards are not intended to preclude clinical judgment or more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information about management of diabetes, refer to references 1–3. The recommendations included are screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A large number of these interventions have been shown to be cost-effective (4). A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) andmodeled after existingmethods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E. These standards of care are revised annually by the ADA’s multidisciplinary Professional Practice Committee, incorporating new evidence. For the current revision, committee members systematically searched Medline for human studies related to each subsection and published since 1 January 2010. Recommendations (bulleted at the beginning of each subsection and also listed in the “Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012”) were revised based on new evidence or, in some cases, to clarify the prior recommendation or match the strength of the wording to the strength of the evidence. A table linking the changes in recommendations to new evidence can be reviewed at http:// professional.diabetes.org/CPR_Search. aspx. Subsequently, as is the case for all Position Statements, the standards of care were reviewed and approved by the ExecutiveCommittee of ADA’s Board ofDirectors, which includes health care professionals, scientists, and lay people. Feedback from the larger clinical community was valuable for the 2012 revision of the standards. Readers who wish to comment on the “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012” are invited to do so at http://professional.diabetes.org/ CPR_Search.aspx. Members of the Professional Practice Committee disclose all potential financial conflicts of interest with industry. These disclosures were discussed at the onset of the standards revisionmeeting. Members of the committee, their employer, and their disclosed conflicts of interest are listed in the “Professional PracticeCommitteeMembers” table (see pg. S109). The AmericanDiabetes Association funds development of the standards and all its position statements out of its general revenues and does not utilize industry support for these purposes.

A systematic review of the literature

Abstract: OBJECTIVE — To systematically review the incidence of posttransplantation diabetes (PTD), risk factors for its development, prognostic implications, and optimal management. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS — We searched databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and others) from inception to September 2000, reviewed bibliographies in reports retrieved, contacted transplantation experts, and reviewed specialty journals. Two reviewers independently determined report inclusion (original studies, in all languages, of PTD in adults with no history of diabetes before transplantation), assessed study methods, and extracted data using a standardized form. Meta-regression was used to explain between-study differences in incidence. RESULTS — Nineteen studies with 3,611 patients were included. The 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD is lower (10% in most studies) than it was 3 decades ago. The type of immunosuppression explained 74% of the variability in incidence (P 0.0004). Risk factors were patient age, nonwhite ethnicity, glucocorticoid treatment for rejection, and immunosuppression with high-dose cyclosporine and tacrolimus. PTD was associated with decreased graft and patient survival in earlier studies; later studies showed improved outcomes. Randomized trials of treatment regimens have not been conducted. CONCLUSIONS — Physicians should consider modification of immunosuppressive regimens to decrease the risk of PTD in high-risk transplant recipients. Randomized trials are needed to evaluate the use of oral glucose-lowering agents in transplant recipients, paying particular attention to interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. Diabetes Care 25:583–592, 2002