International Diabetes Federation guideline for management of postmeal glucose: a review of recommendations

Diabetes is a significant and growing concern, with over 246 million people around the world living with the disease and another 308 million with impaired glucose tolerance. Depending on the resources of different nations, intervention has generally focused on optimizing overall glycaemic control as assessed by glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) values. Nevertheless, increasing evidence supports the importance of controlling all three members of the glucose triad, namely HbA1c, FPG and postmeal glucose (PMG) in order to improve outcome in diabetes. As part of its global mission to promote diabetes care and prevention and to find a cure, the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) recently developed a guideline that reviews evidence to date on PMG and the development of diabetic complications. Based on an extensive database search of the literature, and guided by a Steering and Development Committee including experts from around the world, the IDF Guideline for Management of Postmeal Glucose offers recommendations for appropriate clinical management of PMG. These recommendations are intended to help clinicians and organizations in developing strategies for effective management of PMG in individuals with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. The following review highlights the recommendations of the guideline, the supporting evidence provided and the major conclusions drawn. The full guideline is available for download at http://www.idf.org

Training tomorrow's doctors in diabetes: self-reported confidence levels, practice and perceived training needs of post-graduate trainee doctors in the UK. A multi-centre survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To assess the confidence, practices and perceived training needs in diabetes care of post-graduate trainee doctors in the UK.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An anonymised postal questionnaire using a validated 'Confidence Rating' (CR) scale was applied to aspects of diabetes care and administered to junior doctors from three UK hospitals. The frequency of aspects of day-to-day practice was assessed using a five-point scale with narrative description in combination with numeric values. Respondents had a choice of 'always' (100%), 'almost always' (80–99%), 'often' (50–79%), 'not very often' (20–49%) and 'rarely' (less than 20%). Yes/No questions were used to assess perception of further training requirements. Additional 'free-text' comments were also sought.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>82 doctors completed the survey. The mean number of years since medical qualification was 3 years and 4 months, (range: 4 months to 14 years and 1 month). Only 11 of the respondents had undergone specific diabetes training since qualification.</p> <p>4(5%) reported 'not confident' (CR1), 30 (37%) 'satisfactory but lacked confidence' (CR2), 25 (30%) felt 'confident in some cases' (CR3) and 23 (28%) doctors felt fully confident (CR4) in diagnosing diabetes. 12 (15%) doctors would always, 24 (29%) almost always, 20 (24%) often, 22 (27%) not very often and 4 (5%) rarely take the initiative to optimise gcaemic control. 5 (6%) reported training in diagnosis of diabetes was adequate while 59 (72%) would welcome more training. Reported confidence was better in managing diabetes emergencies, with 4 (5%) not confident in managing hypoglycaemia, 10 (12%) lacking confidence, 22 (27%) confident in some cases and 45 (55%) fully confident in almost all cases. Managing diabetic ketoacidosis, 5 (6%) doctors did not feel confident, 16 (20%) lacked confidence, 20 (24%) confident in some cases, and 40 (50%) felt fully confident in almost all cases.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is a lack of confidence in managing aspects of diabetes care, including the management of diabetes emergencies, amongst postgraduate trainee doctors with a perceived need for more training. This may have considerable significance and further research is required to identify the causes of deficiencies identified in this study.</p

Developing criteria for Cesarean Section using the RAND appropriateness method

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cesarean section rates are increasing worldwide, and a rapid increase has been observed in Iran. Disagreement exists between clinicians about when to use cesarean section. We aimed to identify the appropriateness criteria for the use of cesarean section in Iran.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>A consensus development study using a modified version of the RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM). We generated scenarios from valid clinical guidelines and expert opinions. A panel of experts participated in consensus development: first round via mail (12 members), second round face-to-face (9 members). We followed the RAM recommendations for the development of the scenario lists, rating scales, and statistical analyses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>294 scenarios relevant to cesarean section were identified. 191 scenarios were considered appropriate, of which 125 scenarios were agreed upon. The panel found cesarean inappropriate for 21% of scenarios, and 'equivocal' for 14% of scenarios.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>RAM is useful for identifying stakeholder views in settings with limited resources. The participants' views on appropriateness of certain indications differed with available evidence. A large number of scenarios without agreement may partly explain why it has been difficult to curb the growth in cesarean section rate.</p

Second thoughts about implementing routine screening of cancer patients for distress

Recommendations for routine screening of cancer patients for distress lack evidence that screening improves patient outcomes. Settings contemplating screening should consider other options for using the same resources. This article reviews evidence relevant to decision making and calls attention to limits in using screening instruments cross-culturally and for triaging patients for receipt of services. Whether screening is the best option depends on the patient population, culture, and health system

Development and potential role of type-2 sodium-glucose transporter inhibitors for management of type 2 diabetes

There is a recognized need for new treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Recovery of glucose from the glomerular filtrate represents an important mechanism in maintaining glucose homeostasis and represents a novel target for the management of T2DM. Recovery of glucose from the glomerular filtrate is executed principally by the type 2 sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT2). Inhibition of SGLT2 promotes glucose excretion and normalizes glycemia in animal models. First reports of specifically designed SGLT2 inhibitors began to appear in the second half of the 1990s. Several candidate SGLT2 inhibitors are currently under development, with four in the later stages of clinical testing. The safety profile of SGLT2 inhibitors is expected to be good, as their target is a highly specific membrane transporter expressed almost exclusively within the renal tubules. One safety concern is that of glycosuria, which could predispose patients to increased urinary tract infections. So far the reported safety profile of SGLT2 inhibitors in clinical studies appears to confirm that the class is well tolerated. Where SGLT2 inhibitors will fit in the current cascade of treatments for T2DM has yet to be established. The expected favorable safety profile and insulin-independent mechanism of action appear to support their use in combination with other antidiabetic drugs. Promotion of glucose excretion introduces the opportunity to clear calories (80–90 g [300–400 calories] of glucose per day) in patients that are generally overweight, and is expected to work synergistically with weight reduction programs. Experience will most likely lead to better understanding of which patients are likely to respond best to SGLT2 inhibitors, and under what circumstances