Manel Mata-Cases1,2,3, Josep Franch-Nadal1,2,4, Jordi Real1,5, Mònica Gratacòs1, Flora López-Simarro6, Kamlesh Khunti7, Dídac Mauricio1,2,8. 1. DAP-Cat group. Unitat de Suport a la Recerca Barcelona Ciutat, Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (IDIAP Jordi Gol), Barcelona, Spain. 2. CIBER of Diabetes and Associated Metabolic Diseases (CIBERDEM), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Madrid, Spain. 3. Primary Health Care Center La Mina, Gerència d'Àmbit d'Atenció Primària Barcelona Ciutat, Institut Català de la Salut, Sant Adrià de Besòs, Spain. 4. Primary Health Care Center Raval Sud, Gerència d'Atenció Primaria, Institut Català de la Salut, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Epidemiologia i Salut Pública, Sant Cugat, Spain. 6. Àrea Bàsica de Salut Martorell, Institut Català de la Salut, Martorell, Spain. 7. Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 8. Department of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Health Sciences Research Institute and Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the patterns and predictors of treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes on ≥2 non-insulin antidiabetic drugs (NIADs) and inadequate glycaemic control in primary care in Catalonia, Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis using electronic medical records from patients with HbA1c ≥ 7% and a first prescription for a new NIAD or insulin recorded from January 2010 to December 2014. Therapeutic inertia was defined as no intensification if HbA1c was ≥8% at baseline or during follow-up. Time to first intensification was evaluated by time-to-event analysis, and factors predicting intensification through a competing-risk regression model. RESULTS: Among 23 678 patients with HbA1c ≥ 7%, 26.2% were censored without treatment intensification after a median follow up of 4.2 years. Among the 12 730 patients in the subgroup with HbA1c ≥ 8% at baseline or during follow-up, therapeutic inertia was present in 18.1% of cases. In the overall cohort, mean HbA1c at initiation of insulin and NIAD were 9.4% ± 1.5% and 8.7% ± 1.3%, respectively. Median time to first intensification was 17.1 months in patients with HbA1c 8.0% to 9.9%, and 10.1 months in those with HbA1c > 10%. Variables strongly associated with intensification were HbA1c values 8.0% to 9.9% (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.65-1.78) and >10% (SHR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.37-2.68); diabetes duration ≥20 years (SHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.41) and, to a lesser extent, female gender, presence of comorbidities, chronic kidney disease and microvascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Intensification was not undertaken in 1 in 5 patients. Both HbA1c thresholds and time until therapy intensification exceeded current recommendations.
AIMS: To determine the patterns and predictors of treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes on ≥2 non-insulin antidiabetic drugs (NIADs) and inadequate glycaemic control in primary care in Catalonia, Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis using electronic medical records from patients with HbA1c ≥ 7% and a first prescription for a new NIAD or insulin recorded from January 2010 to December 2014. Therapeutic inertia was defined as no intensification if HbA1c was ≥8% at baseline or during follow-up. Time to first intensification was evaluated by time-to-event analysis, and factors predicting intensification through a competing-risk regression model. RESULTS: Among 23 678 patients with HbA1c ≥ 7%, 26.2% were censored without treatment intensification after a median follow up of 4.2 years. Among the 12 730 patients in the subgroup with HbA1c ≥ 8% at baseline or during follow-up, therapeutic inertia was present in 18.1% of cases. In the overall cohort, mean HbA1c at initiation of insulin and NIAD were 9.4% ± 1.5% and 8.7% ± 1.3%, respectively. Median time to first intensification was 17.1 months in patients with HbA1c 8.0% to 9.9%, and 10.1 months in those with HbA1c > 10%. Variables strongly associated with intensification were HbA1c values 8.0% to 9.9% (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.65-1.78) and >10% (SHR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.37-2.68); diabetes duration ≥20 years (SHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.41) and, to a lesser extent, female gender, presence of comorbidities, chronic kidney disease and microvascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Intensification was not undertaken in 1 in 5 patients. Both HbA1c thresholds and time until therapy intensification exceeded current recommendations.
Authors: Gustavo Saposnik; Xavier Montalban; Daniel Selchen; Maria A Terzaghi; Fabien Bakdache; Alonso Montoya; Manuel Fruns; Fernando Caceres; Jiwon Oh Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: M Angelyn Bethel; Samuel S Engel; Susanna R Stevens; Yuliya Lokhnygina; Jie Ding; Robert G Josse; Michael Alvarsson; Irene Hramiak; Jennifer B Green; Eric D Peterson; Rury R Holman Journal: Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Date: 2018-12-22
Authors: Rohini Mathur; Ruth E Farmer; Sophie V Eastwood; Nish Chaturvedi; Ian Douglas; Liam Smeeth Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 11.069