BACKGROUND: Prediabetes affects 1 in 3 Americans. Both intensive lifestyle intervention and metformin can prevent or delay progression to diabetes. Over the past decade, lifestyle interventions have been translated across various settings, but little is known about the translation of evidence surrounding metformin use. OBJECTIVE: To examine metformin prescription for diabetes prevention and patient characteristics that may affect metformin prescription. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis over a 3-year period. SETTING: Employer groups that purchased health plans from the nation's largest private insurer. PARTICIPANTS: A national sample of 17 352 working-age adults with prediabetes insured for 3 continuous years between 2010 and 2012. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of health plan enrollees with prediabetes who were prescribed metformin. RESULTS: Only 3.7% of patients with prediabetes were prescribed metformin over the 3-year study window. After adjustment for age, income, and education, the predicted probability of metformin prescription was almost 2 times higher among women and obese patients and more than 1.5 times higher among patients with 2 or more comorbid conditions. LIMITATION: Missing data on lifestyle interventions, possible misclassification of prediabetes and metformin use, and inability to define eligible patients exactly as defined in the American Diabetes Association guidelines. CONCLUSION: Evidence shows that metformin is rarely prescribed for diabetes prevention in working-age adults. Future studies are needed to understand potential barriers to wider adoption of this safe, tolerable, evidence-based, and cost-effective prediabetes therapy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Division of Diabetes Translation) and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
BACKGROUND:Prediabetes affects 1 in 3 Americans. Both intensive lifestyle intervention and metformin can prevent or delay progression to diabetes. Over the past decade, lifestyle interventions have been translated across various settings, but little is known about the translation of evidence surrounding metformin use. OBJECTIVE: To examine metformin prescription for diabetes prevention and patient characteristics that may affect metformin prescription. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis over a 3-year period. SETTING: Employer groups that purchased health plans from the nation's largest private insurer. PARTICIPANTS: A national sample of 17 352 working-age adults with prediabetes insured for 3 continuous years between 2010 and 2012. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of health plan enrollees with prediabetes who were prescribed metformin. RESULTS: Only 3.7% of patients with prediabetes were prescribed metformin over the 3-year study window. After adjustment for age, income, and education, the predicted probability of metformin prescription was almost 2 times higher among women and obesepatients and more than 1.5 times higher among patients with 2 or more comorbid conditions. LIMITATION: Missing data on lifestyle interventions, possible misclassification of prediabetes and metformin use, and inability to define eligible patients exactly as defined in the American Diabetes Association guidelines. CONCLUSION: Evidence shows that metformin is rarely prescribed for diabetes prevention in working-age adults. Future studies are needed to understand potential barriers to wider adoption of this safe, tolerable, evidence-based, and cost-effective prediabetes therapy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Division of Diabetes Translation) and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Authors: Jaana Lindström; Pirjo Ilanne-Parikka; Markku Peltonen; Sirkka Aunola; Johan G Eriksson; Katri Hemiö; Helena Hämäläinen; Pirjo Härkönen; Sirkka Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi; Mauri Laakso; Anne Louheranta; Marjo Mannelin; Merja Paturi; Jouko Sundvall; Timo T Valle; Matti Uusitupa; Jaakko Tuomilehto Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-11-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: William C Knowler; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Sarah E Fowler; Richard F Hamman; John M Lachin; Elizabeth A Walker; David M Nathan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jill Crandall; David Schade; Yong Ma; Wilfred Y Fujimoto; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Sarah Fowler; Sam Dagogo-Jack; Reubin Andres Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Jaana Lindström; Anne Louheranta; Marjo Mannelin; Merja Rastas; Virpi Salminen; Johan Eriksson; Matti Uusitupa; Jaakko Tuomilehto Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Magnolia Cardona-Morrell; Lucie Rychetnik; Stephen L Morrell; Paola T Espinel; Adrian Bauman Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Eva Tseng; Raquel C Greer; Paul O'Rourke; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Maura M McGuire; Jeanne M Clark; Nisa M Maruthur Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mohammed K Ali; Frank Wharam; O Kenrik Duru; Julie Schmittdiel; Ronald T Ackermann; Jeanine Albu; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Christine M Hunter; Carol Mangione; Edward W Gregg Journal: Curr Diab Rep Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 4.810
Authors: Matthew J O'Brien; Margaret R Moran; Joyce W Tang; Maria C Vargas; Mary Talen; Laura J Zimmermann; Ronald T Ackermann; Namratha R Kandula Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2016-09-12 Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Alberly Perez; Victor A Alos; Adam Scanlan; Catarina M Maia; Adam Davey; Robert C Whitaker; Gary D Foster; Ronald T Ackermann; Matthew J O'Brien Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2015-10-24 Impact factor: 2.226