Literature DB >> 33431600

Association between hemoglobin A1c variability and hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations in veterans with diabetes mellitus.

Molly J Y Zhao1,2, Julia C Prentice3,4, David C Mohr3,5, Paul R Conlin6,7.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To study the impact of hemoglobin A1c (A1c) variability on the risk of hypoglycemia-related hospitalization (HRH) in veterans with diabetes mellitus. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: 342 059 veterans with diabetes aged 65 years or older were identified for a retrospective cohort study. All participants had a 3-year baseline period from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2016, during which they had at least four A1c tests. A1c variability measures included coefficient of variation (A1c CV), A1c SD, and adjusted A1c SD. HRH was identified during a 2-year follow-up period from Medicare and the Veterans Health Administration through validated algorithms of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes. Logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate the relationship between A1c variability and HRH risk while controlling for relevant clinical covariates.
RESULTS: 2871 patients had one or more HRH in the 2-year follow-up period. HRH risk increased with greater A1c variability, and this was consistent across A1c CV, A1c SD, and adjusted A1c SD. Average A1c levels were also independently associated with HRH, with levels <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) having lower risk and >9% (75 mmol/mol) with greater risk. The relationships between A1c variability remained significant after controlling for average A1c levels and prior HRH during the baseline period.
CONCLUSION: Increasing A1c variability and elevated A1c levels are associated with a greater risk of HRH in older adults with diabetes. Clinicians should consider A1c variability when assessing patients for risk of severe hypoglycemia. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diabetes complications; hypoglycemia

Year:  2021        PMID: 33431600      PMCID: PMC7802724          DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001797

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care        ISSN: 2052-4897


Hypoglycemia-related hospitalization (HRH) increases the risk of mortality in older adults with diabetes. Several patient-level factors predict the risk of severe hypoglycemia, but hemoglobin A1c (A1c) levels have an uncertain relationship to HRH, which highlights that A1c levels alone may be insufficient to understand risk. Variability in A1c levels is associated with increased risk of diabetes complications and mortality. Increasing A1c variability was associated with greater risk of HRH over a 2-year follow-up period, after controlling for A1c levels and several clinical and sociodemographic covariates. Higher A1c levels >9% (75 mmol/mol) conferred greater risk of HRH after controlling for A1c variability. The relationship between A1c variability and HRH risk remained significant after controlling for prior HRH events. A1c variability over time should be considered when assessing risk of severe hypoglycemia in older adults with diabetes.

Introduction

Severe hypoglycemia resulting in hospitalization leads to poor health outcomes and mortality in older adults with diabetes mellitus.1–5 Concerns about treatment-associated hypoglycemia have assumed greater importance as rates of hypoglycemia-related hospitalization (HRH) increased between 1999 and 2011 and surpassed hyperglycemia-related hospitalization rates between 1999 and 2011.6 Several patient-level risk factors independently predict severe hypoglycemia events, such as older age, diabetes treatment that includes insulin or sulfonylureas, black race, lower body mass index (BMI), renal disease, cognitive impairment, and history of hypoglycemic events.2 7–10 Additional concerns exist for older adults who are potentially overtreated in the setting of comorbid conditions.11 Thus, many diabetes treatment guidelines favor individualized and higher hemoglobin A1c (A1c) targets for at-risk older adults to balance long-term glycemic benefits and short-term hypoglycemia risk.12–15 Maintaining patients in an appropriate glycemic range is also complicated by uncertainty about the relationship between A1c and risk of hypoglycemia. Some studies show that higher A1c confers increased risk of hypoglycemia,16 while others show an inverse relationship, with lower A1c associated with increased risk.17 This suggests that A1c levels alone may not define risk but are part of a dynamic relationship with patient-level factors and medications that result in greater glucose variability over time. A1c variability is associated with increased hospitalizations, diabetes complications, and mortality.18–23 These risks persist when controlled for A1c levels18 19 21 and are independent of standard or intensive diabetes treatment.24 25 Therefore, more indepth study of the relationship between A1c variability and HRH is warranted. This study was designed to validate the clinical implications of A1c variability and substantiate its effects on HRH in older adults with diabetes. We used a large nationwide sample of veterans with diabetes to study the association between measures of A1c variability and risk of HRH while controlling for several relevant sociodemographic and clinical factors.

Methods

Study population

We combined administrative data sets from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and Medicare to gather sociodemographic and clinical measures and outpatient and inpatient utilization. Visit dates and diagnosis codes necessary for identifying HRH were obtained from inpatient discharge records in VA and Medicare inpatient databases. Medications, laboratory tests, financial means tests, and percentage of service-connected disability were extracted from the VA’s administrative claims. We identified veterans diagnosed with diabetes who were aged 65 years or older, enrolled in VA care and dually eligible for Medicare during the period of January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2014 (figure 1). A diabetes diagnosis was determined using published criteria26: (1) two or more diabetes diagnosis codes from outpatient visits or (2) one inpatient hospitalization for diabetes over a 2-year period or (3) a prescription for diabetes medication (excluding metformin alone) in the current year. Patients taking metformin alone were included if they had concomitant diabetes diagnosis codes. The latter typically captures at least 97% of patients with diabetes.26 A small number of patients may take metformin for non-diabetes diagnoses, so this criterion was used to increase specificity. Patients were required to have four or more A1c measurements over a consecutive 3-year baseline period, with sequential A1c tests ≤365 days apart. A total of 395 950 patients met these criteria. We excluded 53 891 patients who died in the follow-up period. Thus, 342 059 patients remained in the study sample for statistical analyses.
Figure 1

Flow chart of the selective criteria used to create the final study sample (N=342 059). HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ICD, International Classification of Diseases; VA, Veterans Health Administration.

Flow chart of the selective criteria used to create the final study sample (N=342 059). HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ICD, International Classification of Diseases; VA, Veterans Health Administration.

Outcomes, exposures and covariates

HRH was defined as hospital admissions with a principal discharge diagnosis of hypoglycemia based on validated algorithms of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes27 28 occurring prior to December 31, 2016. The outcome did not include transfers and secondary diagnoses of hypoglycemia because these may have occurred during hospitalization or secondary to another acute event.6 A1c variability was described by A1c coefficient of variation (A1c CV), A1c SD, and adjusted A1c SD. A1c CV was calculated by dividing A1c SD by the average A1c value and expressed as per cent. Adjusted A1c SD accounted for the number of A1c measurements and the days between each measurement using a linear regression formula.21 Finally, the three measures of A1c variability were transformed into quartiles for analysis. We also included mean A1c categories (<6% (42 mmol/mol), 6%–6.9% (42–52 mmol/mol), 7%–7.9% (53–63 mmol/mol), 8%–8.9% (64–74 mmol/mol), ≥9% (75 mmol/mol)) as a covariate to assess the independent effect of A1c variability on HRH. Sociodemographic factors included age at the start of the baseline period (categorized as 65–74 and ≥75 years), sex, race, financial means test (which assesses financial resources and determines a requirement for copayments for VA services), and percentage of service-connected disability (as a marker of disability status, where >50% exempts patients from copayments). Other clinical covariates from the baseline period included glucose-lowering medications (eg, insulin, sulfonylurea, metformin, alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, thiazolidinedione, and less commonly used medications), serum creatinine, urine albumin to creatinine ratio, serum albumin, and BMI. All biological measures were averaged over the baseline period. We calculated the logarithmic number of outpatient and inpatient visits from the baseline period to account for utilization of clinical services. Year of follow-up was included to account for secular changes in diabetes management over time.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using STATA MP V.15.1. Patient characteristics in the HRH and non-HRH populations were assessed for significance with the χ2 test for binary attributes, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for intervals of clinical characteristics, and the two-sample t-test for continuous measures. We performed a logistic regression for each A1c variability measure to evaluate the relationship between A1c variability and the risk of HRH in the 2-year follow-up period, controlling for relevant clinical and sociodemographic covariates. Results were expressed as OR with their 95% CI. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Sensitivity analyses

To test the robustness of our results, we evaluated statistical models with 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods. Because prior HRH may confer higher risk for new HRH events,8 we evaluated the association between A1c variability and HRH risk with an additional covariate that identified patients with any HRH during the baseline period. We also determined if the number of A1c tests during the baseline period impacted the study results.

Results

Study cohort

The study sample of 342 059 had 2871 patients with one or more HRH in the 2-year follow-up period. The baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with no HRH and those who developed HRH in the 2-year follow-up period are presented in table 1. Both groups were predominantly male and white, but the HRH group had twice the percentage of black patients than the non-HRH group. The average (SD) age of patients in the HRH and non-HRH groups was 75.8 (5.5) and 74.1 (5.5) years, respectively, and the average (SD) A1c level was 7.5% (1.2%) (58 mmol/mol) and 7.0% (1.0%) (53 mmol/mol), respectively. Insulin, sulfonylurea, and thiazolidinedione use was higher and metformin use was lower in the HRH group. There were more patients with A1c ≥9% (75 mmol/mol) in the HRH population, whereas in the non-HRH population there were more patients with A1c ≤7% (53 mmol/mol). The mean values of A1c CV, A1c SD, and adjusted A1c SD (10%, 0.76, and 1.72, respectively) were significantly higher (p<0.001) among patients with HRH than those without HRH (7%, 0.54, and 1.28).
Table 1

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics

Non-HRH population (n=339 188)HRH population(n=2871)Study population (N=342 059)P value
Patients (n)%Patients (n)%Patients (n)%
Sex0.325
 Male334 81499282899337 64299
 Female4374143144171
Race<0.001
 White292 49586216275294 65786
 Black36 307116122136 91911
 Hispanic5151255252062
 Asian1283014012970
 Other3952128139801
Age (years)<0.001
 64–74203 58560133246204 91760
 75+135 60340153954137 14240
Diabetes medication use
Insulin<0.001
 No262 00877144550263 45377
 Yes77 1802314265078 60623
Metformin<0.001
 No165 77149168559167 45649
 Yes173 41751118641174 60351
Sulfonylurea<0.001
 No157 96847100735158 97547
 Yes181 22053186465183 08454
Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors0.013
 No332 63098279797335 42798
 Yes6558274366322
Thiazolidinedione<0.001
 No283 99784225879286 25584
 Yes55 191166132155 80416
Other medications*0.512
 No333 94898283199336 77998
 Yes5240240152802
Average A1c (%)<0.001
 <638 23311175638 40811
 6–6.9157 5484687831158 42646
 7–7.997 6762910153598 69129
 8–8.932 664104961733 16010
 ≥913 06743071113 3744
Serum creatinine (mg/dL)<0.001
 <0.62980303010
 0.6–1.2188 12255102736189 14955
 >1.2141 25342178062143 03342
 Missing†9515361295763
Urine albumin to creatinine ratio (mg/g)<0.001
 <3093 900285301894 43028
 30–30043 612134941744 10613
 >30066072114467212
 Missing†195 06958173360196 80258
Serum albumin (g/dL)<0.001
 <3.520 66563661321 0316
 ≥3.5282 09383227379284 36683
 Missing†36 43011232836 66211
Body mass index (kg/m2)<0.001
 <18.54130904220
 18.5–24.940 730124221541 15212
 25–29129 69738107838130 77538
 30–39138 73241113940139 87141
 ≥4014 8544117414 9714
 Missing†14 7624106414 8684
Service-connected disability† (%)0.898
 <50292 56486247486295 03886
 ≥5046 623143971447 02014
 Missing†100010
Financial means test<0.001
 Exempt104 11031103936105 14931
 Copayment required98 130297172598 84729
 Missing†136 94840111539138 06340

*Other medications: amylin analog, bile acid sequestrants, dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitors, dopamine receptor agonist, glucagon-like peptide, meglitinides, and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitor.

†Values missing from source database.

HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization.

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics *Other medications: amylin analog, bile acid sequestrants, dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitors, dopamine receptor agonist, glucagon-like peptide, meglitinides, and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitor. †Values missing from source database. HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization. There was a consistent and positive relationship between A1c variability and HRH in models that controlled for mean A1c levels and sociodemographic and clinical covariates (table 2). A1c CV, A1c SD, and adjusted A1c SD showed increasing risk of HRH throughout quartiles 2–4 in comparison with quartile 1. The adjusted A1c SD had significantly increased odds of HRH in the highest quartile. Higher mean A1c levels were also associated with greater HRH risk after controlling for each of the A1c variability measures. Compared with patients with mean baseline A1c 7%–7.9% (53–63 mmol/mol), patients with A1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) had a significantly lower risk of HRH and A1c >9% (75 mmol/mol) had a significantly higher risk. Other factors carrying increased HRH risk included insulin and sulfonylurea use, increased urine albumin to creatinine excretion (>30 mg/g), higher serum creatinine (>1.2 mg/dL), black race, and age ≥75 years. These associations remained consistent across all three measures of A1c variability (online supplemental appendix tables 1–3).
Table 2

Summary of A1c variability measures and HRH risk during 2-year follow-up period (n=342 058)*

Model†OR (95% CI)P value
Model 1
 A1c coefficient of variation (%) (ref <4)
  4–5.91.19 (1.04 to 1.36)0.011
  6–9.41.28 (1.13 to 1.47)<0.001
  9.5–661.44 (1.26 to 1.65)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.66 (0.56 to 0.78)<0.001
  6–6.90.78 (0.71 to 0.86)<0.001
  8–8.91.11 (1.00 to 1.24)0.060
  ≥91.53 (1.33 to 1.75)<0.001
Model 2
 A1c SD (ref <0.25)
  0.25–0.401.26 (1.10 to 1.45)0.001
  0.41–0.681.36 (1.18 to 1.56)<0.001
  0.69–6.461.56 (1.35 to 1.81)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.71 (0.59 to 0.84)<0.001
  6–6.90.81 (0.73 to 0.89)<0.001
  8–8.91.09 (0.98 to 1.22)0.125
  ≥91.49 (1.30 to 1.72)<0.001
Model 3
 Adjusted A1c SD (ref <0.62)
  0.62–0.971.08 (0.95 to 1.24)0.239
  0.98–1.561.12 (0.98 to 1.27)0.103
  1.57–17.401.37 (1.20 to 1.57)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.67 (0.56 to 0.79)<0.001
  6–6.90.79 (0.71 to 0.87)<0.001
  8–8.91.09 (0.98 to 1.22)0.115
  ≥91.48 (1.29 to 1.70)<0.001

*One patient was dropped from logistic regression due to missing service-connected disability.

†Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section.

HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference.

Summary of A1c variability measures and HRH risk during 2-year follow-up period (n=342 058)* *One patient was dropped from logistic regression due to missing service-connected disability. †Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section. HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference. The same models of A1c CV, A1c SD and adjusted A1c SD were used to study 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods (table 3; online supplemental appendix tables 4 and 5). During the 1-year of follow-up, relationships between A1c variability measures and HRH risk were significant in the highest quartile. The 3-year follow-up model generated ORs very similar to the 2-year model, showing increased HRH risk associated with all A1c variability measures.
Table 3

A1c variability and HRH risk in 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods*

Model†1-year (n=375 519)3-year (n=308 241)
OR (95% CI)P valueOR (95% CI)P value
Model 1
 A1c coefficient of variation (%) (ref <4)
  4–5.91.10 (0.92 to 1.31)0.2861.20 (1.06 to 1.35)0.003
  6–9.41.12 (0.94 to 1.33)0.2011.35 (1.20 to 1.52)<0.001
  9.5–661.33 (1.12 to 1.58)0.0011.48 (1.31 to 1.67)<0.001
Model 2
 A1c SD (ref <0.25)
  0.25–0.401.18 (0.98 to 1.41)0.0751.26 (1.11 to 1.43)<0.001
  0.41–0.681.15 (0.96 to 1.38)0.1381.42 (1.25 to 1.60)<0.001
  0.69–6.461.4 0 (1.16 to 1.69)0.0011.58 (1.39 to 1.80)<0.001
Model 3
 Adjusted A1c SD (ref <0.62)
  0.62–0.971.02 (0.86 to 1.21)0.8121.17 (1.04 to 1.32)0.008
  0.98–1.561.03 (0.87 to 1.22)0.7311.23 (1.10 to 1.38)0.001
  1.57–17.401.29 (1.09 to 1.54)0.0041.48 (1.31 to 1.67)<0.001

*The risk of HRH in 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods was assessed separately using the logistic regression model indicated in the Methods section.

†Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section.

HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference.

A1c variability and HRH risk in 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods* *The risk of HRH in 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods was assessed separately using the logistic regression model indicated in the Methods section. †Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section. HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference. Additional analysis that assessed the impact of prior HRH events did not modify the association between A1c variability and increased HRH risk (table 4). Prior HRH conferred a threefold higher risk of future HRH,8 but higher A1c variability and mean A1c continued to be significantly associated with HRH (table 4; online supplemental appendix tables 6–8).
Table 4

Sensitivity analysis of prior HRH’s impact on HRH risk* (n=342 058)†

Model‡OR (95% CI)P value
Model 1
 A1c coefficient of variation (%) (ref <4)
  4–5.91.19 (1.04 to 1.37)0.010
  6–9.41.28 (1.12 to 1.46)<0.001
  9.5–661.42 (1.24 to 1.63)<0.001
 Prior HRH (ref=no)
  Yes3.12 (2.65 to 3.67)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.67 (0.56 to 0.79)<0.001
  6–6.90.78 (0.71 to 0.86)<0.001
  8–8.91.11 (1.00 to 1.25)0.057
  ≥91.53 (1.33 to 1.75)<0.001
Model 2
 A1c SD (ref <0.25)
  0.25–0.401.26 (1.10 to 1.45)0.001
  0.41–0.681.35 (1.17 to 1.55)<0.001
  0.69–6.461.54 (1.33 to 1.79)<0.001
 Prior HRH (ref=no)
  Yes3.12 (2.65 to 3.67)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.71 (0.60 to 0.85)<0.001
  6–6.90.81 (0.73 to 0.89)<0.001
  8–8.91.09 (0.98 to 1.23)0.117
  ≥91.49 (1.30 to 1.72)<0.001
Model 3
 Adjusted A1c SD (ref <0.62)
  0.62–0.971.08 (0.95 to 1.23)0.253
  0.98–1.561.11 (0.97 to 1.26)0.127
  1.57–17.401.36 (1.19 to 1.56)<0.001
 Prior HRH (ref=no)
  Yes3.12 (2.65 to 3.68)<0.001
 A1c mean (%) (ref=7–7.9)
  <60.67 (0.57 to 0.80)<0.001
  6–6.90.79 (0.71 to 0.87)<0.001
  8–8.91.10 (0.98 to 1.23)0.113
  ≥91.48 (1.29 to 1.70)<0.001

*The sensitivity analysis was executed by adding prior HRH from the baseline period as a binary covariate to the logistic regression indicated in the Methods section.

†One patient was dropped from logistic regression due to missing service-connected disability.

‡Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, previous HRH event, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section.

HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference.

Sensitivity analysis of prior HRH’s impact on HRH risk* (n=342 058)† *The sensitivity analysis was executed by adding prior HRH from the baseline period as a binary covariate to the logistic regression indicated in the Methods section. †One patient was dropped from logistic regression due to missing service-connected disability. ‡Each model was run with a measure of A1c variability in quartiles, previous HRH event, A1c mean, and the covariates listed in the Methods section. HRH, hypoglycemia-related hospitalization; ref, reference. To determine if more frequent A1c testing during baseline impacted the study results, we included the number of A1c tests in the analysis model of A1c CV. This did not change the study results (data not shown).

Discussion

We found a significant and positive relationship between higher A1c variability and HRH over a 2-year follow-up period among veterans with diabetes who were 65 years or older. A1c levels and variability were measured over a 3-year baseline period and patients were then followed to assess HRH events. Significance of the associations and the level of risk varied somewhat across the different A1c variability measures, but all showed consistent and graded relationships with HRH. Average A1c levels were also significantly and independently associated with HRH, with levels <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) associated with lower risk and levels >9% (75 mmol/mol) conferring greater risk. In sensitivity analyses, prior HRH carried higher HRH risk, but when prior HRH was included as a covariate, A1c variability measures remained strong predictors of HRH. High A1c variability was significantly and independently associated with risk of HRH for up to 3 years following the baseline period. Clinical practice guidelines13–15 have emphasized the need for individualized and higher A1c targets in older adults with diabetes to balance risks and benefits. Our results also suggest that A1c variability has an independent and significant effect on HRH risk, and tracking A1c levels alone may be insufficient to mitigate risk. We confirmed that guideline-directed A1c targets for many older adults with diabetes are reasonable for minimizing risk of HRH, since A1c levels between 7% and 8.9% (53–74 mmol/mol) carried similar risk. We also showed that A1c levels >9% (75 mmol/mol) are linked to increased risk of HRH and lower levels (<7%, 53 mmol/mol) are associated with lower risk. Studies have shown differing relationships between A1c levels and severe hypoglycemia, with high A1c,16 29 low A1c,17 or both30 carrying increased risk.16 17 30 Unlike other studies, we included a large and broad sample of older adults with diabetes and captured outcomes from both VA and Medicare data. It is possible that differences across various studies may reflect variations in the patient population, diabetes treatment, definitions of hypoglycemia, and duration of follow-up. We acknowledge that several methods for calculating A1c variability have been proposed, including traditional variance measures such as CV and SD, as well as categorical measures that incorporate absolute change in A1c.18 19 23 25 31 Since the majority of prior publications have used CV or SD to measure A1c variability we also opted for these methods. Additional significant risk factors associated with HRH include use of insulin or sulfonylurea medications, black race, elevated serum creatinine, increased urine albumin to creatinine ratio, and age >75 years. Many of these same characteristics or conditions have been associated with risk of severe hypoglycemia.7–10 It is most likely that these factors are linked to HRH through effects of treatment, including adverse effects, or are markers of disease burden. Prior HRH events were also significantly associated with future risk of HRH, as has been previously shown.8 18 Metformin usage and high BMI were associated with lower risk of HRH. Metformin has been associated with lower incidence of hypoglycemia32 and higher BMI has been shown to carry reduced incidence of severe hypoglycemia, possibly due to the increased insulin resistance present in obesity.33–35 Patients at highest risk for HRH are those with both high A1c levels and high A1c variability, and these clinical findings often reflect the complex interplay of disease severity, treatment, and sociodemographic factors. For example, patients with high A1c levels and A1c variability are more likely to be treated with insulin or multidrug regimens, have competing conditions or comorbidities that complicate diabetes treatment,31 36 and experience medication adherence issues.37 A1c variability is clearly influenced by these underlying factors that affect glucose control over time. The fact that increasing variability is independently associated with HRH should not be overlooked as a marker of increased risk. From an implementation standpoint, healthcare systems may choose to calculate A1c variability measures and identify patients at high risk for major hypoglycemia events. A1c CV ≥6%, A1c SD >0.4 and A1c >9% identify patients at increased HRH risk over a period of 2–3 years. The presence of these measures may alert physicians to individualize care and minimize such risks. Our study has limitations that may affect its generalizability. The study sample represented an older and predominantly white male population and we included only patients with at least four A1c levels over 3 years. Further, the study sample included only veterans, which is a group that has a high prevalence of diabetes,26 has greater physical and mental health comorbidities relative to the general population,38 and may have a substantial number of patients who are potentially overtreated.11 Our results may not extend to younger patients or those with fewer comorbidities. Limited data were available on socioeconomic status and this may not fully account for the impact of social determinants of health on HRH outcomes. We assessed HRH as our outcome of interest, although this represents a more severe form of hypoglycemia. Administrative data do not reliably include milder forms of hypoglycemia such as those treated in the outpatient setting, so these more frequent events were not captured. In addition, our findings do not allow us to determine causality. Nonetheless, the study design has several strengths. We employed a large study sample encompassing a 12-year study period and employed various A1c variability measures. We applied a 3-year baseline period before determining HRH outcomes, which limits concerns about reverse causality. Statistical models included a number of relevant covariates, and we performed sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the findings. In summary, older adults with diabetes with increasing A1c variability and elevated A1c levels (>9%, 75 mmol/mol) are at significantly greater risk of HRH over a 2-year period. Our results suggest that clinicians should consider A1c variability for its potential role in predicting risk of severe hypoglycemia.
  38 in total

1.  Identifying the independent effect of HbA1c variability on adverse health outcomes in patients with Type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  J C Prentice; S D Pizer; P R Conlin
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2016-07-17       Impact factor: 4.359

2.  Treatment of Diabetes in Older Adults: An Endocrine Society* Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Derek LeRoith; Geert Jan Biessels; Susan S Braithwaite; Felipe F Casanueva; Boris Draznin; Jeffrey B Halter; Irl B Hirsch; Marie E McDonnell; Mark E Molitch; M Hassan Murad; Alan J Sinclair
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 5.958

3.  Who has diabetes? Best estimates of diabetes prevalence in the Department of Veterans Affairs based on computerized patient data.

Authors:  Donald R Miller; Monika M Safford; Leonard M Pogach
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 19.112

4.  Variability in Glycated Hemoglobin and Risk of Poor Outcomes Among People With Type 2 Diabetes in a Large Primary Care Cohort Study.

Authors:  Julia A Critchley; Iain M Carey; Tess Harris; Stephen DeWilde; Derek G Cook
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2019-10-03       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 5.  6. Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 19.112

6.  Clinical correlates of hypoglycaemia over 4 years in people with type 2 diabetes starting insulin: An analysis from the CREDIT study.

Authors:  Philip Home; Francoise Calvi-Gries; Lawrence Blonde; Valerie Pilorget; Joseph Berlingieri; Nick Freemantle
Journal:  Diabetes Obes Metab       Date:  2018-01-07       Impact factor: 6.577

7.  The effects of baseline characteristics, glycaemia treatment approach, and glycated haemoglobin concentration on the risk of severe hypoglycaemia: post hoc epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study.

Authors:  Michael E Miller; Denise E Bonds; Hertzel C Gerstein; Elizabeth R Seaquist; Richard M Bergenstal; Jorge Calles-Escandon; R Dale Childress; Timothy E Craven; Robert M Cuddihy; George Dailey; Mark N Feinglos; Farmarz Ismail-Beigi; Joe F Largay; Patrick J O'Connor; Terri Paul; Peter J Savage; Ulrich K Schubart; Ajay Sood; Saul Genuth
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-01-08

8.  Metformin, sulfonylureas, or other antidiabetes drugs and the risk of lactic acidosis or hypoglycemia: a nested case-control analysis.

Authors:  Michael Bodmer; Christian Meier; Stephan Krähenbühl; Susan S Jick; Christoph R Meier
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 17.152

9.  Body mass index influences the plasma glucose concentration during iatrogenic hypoglycemia in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Po Chung Cheng; Shang Ren Hsu; Shih Te Tu; Yun Chung Cheng; Yu Hsiu Liu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 10.  Long-term Glycemic Variability and Risk of Adverse Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Catherine Gorst; Chun Shing Kwok; Saadia Aslam; Iain Buchan; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Phyo K Myint; Grant Heatlie; Yoon Loke; Martin K Rutter; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  3 in total

1.  Beliefs Around Hypoglycemia and Their Impacts on Hypoglycemia Outcomes in Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes and High Risks for Hypoglycemia Despite Using Advanced Diabetes Technologies.

Authors:  Yu Kuei Lin; Caroline R Richardson; Iulia Dobrin; Melissa J DeJonckheere; Kara Mizokami-Stout; Michael D Fetters; James E Aikens; Simon J Fisher; Wen Ye; Rodica Pop-Busui
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Increased Hemoglobin A1c Time in Range Reduces Adverse Health Outcomes in Older Adults With Diabetes.

Authors:  Julia C Prentice; David C Mohr; Libin Zhang; Donglin Li; Aaron Legler; Richard E Nelson; Paul R Conlin
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 17.152

3.  Lost in Translation: A Disconnect Between the Science and Medicare Coverage Criteria for Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion.

Authors:  Grazia Aleppo; Christopher G Parkin; Anders L Carlson; Rodolfo J Galindo; Davida F Kruger; Carol J Levy; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Gregory P Forlenza; Janet B McGill
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 6.118

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.