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

Rosiglitazone RECORD study: glucose control outcomes at 18 months

AIMS: To compare glucose control over 18 months between rosiglitazone oral combination therapy and combination metformin and sulphonylurea in people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: RECORD, a multicentre, parallel-group study of cardiovascular outcomes, enrolled people with an HbA(1c) of 7.1-9.0% on maximum doses of metformin or sulphonylurea. If on metformin they were randomized to add-on rosiglitazone or sulphonylurea (open label) and if on sulphonylurea to rosiglitazone or metformin. HbA(1c) was managed to < or = 7.0% by dose titration. A prospectively defined analysis of glycaemic control on the first 1122 participants is reported here, with a primary outcome assessed against a non-inferiority margin for HbA(1c) of 0.4%. RESULTS: At 18 months, HbA(1c) reduction on background metformin was similar with rosiglitazone and sulphonylurea [difference 0.07 (95% CI -0.09, 0.23)%], as was the change when rosiglitazone or metformin was added to sulphonylurea [0.06 (-0.09, 0.20)%]. At 6 months, the effect on HbA(1c) was greater with add-on sulphonylurea, but was similar whether sulphonylurea was added to rosiglitazone or metformin. Differences in fasting plasma glucose were not statistically significant at 18 months [rosiglitazone vs. sulphonylurea -0.36 (-0.74, 0.02) mmol/l, rosiglitazone vs. metformin -0.34 (-0.73, 0.05) mmol/l]. Increased homeostasis model assessment insulin sensitivity and reduced C-reactive protein were greater with rosiglitazone than metformin or sulphonylurea (all P < or = 0.001). Body weight was significantly increased with rosiglitazone compared with sulphonylurea [difference 1.2 (0.4, 2.0) kg, P = 0.003] and metformin [difference 4.3 (3.6, 5.1) kg, P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: In people with diabetes, rosiglitazone in combination with metformin or sulphonylurea was demonstrated to be non-inferior to the standard combination of metformin + sulphonylurea in lowering HbA(1c) over 18 months, and produces greater improvements in C-reactive protein and basal insulin sensitivity but is also associated with greater weight gain

The value of episodic, intensive blood glucose monitoring in non-insulin treated persons with type 2 diabetes: Design of the Structured Testing Program (STeP) Study, a cluster-randomised, clinical trial [NCT00674986]

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The value and utility of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in non-insulin treated T2DM has yet to be clearly determined. Findings from studies in this population have been inconsistent, due mainly to design differences and limitations, including the prescribed frequency and timing of SMBG, role of the patient and physician in responding to SMBG results, inclusion criteria that may contribute to untoward floor effects, subject compliance, and cross-arm contamination. We have designed an SMBG intervention study that attempts to address these issues.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>The Structured Testing Program (STeP) study is a 12-month, cluster-randomised, multi-centre clinical trial to evaluate whether poorly controlled (HbA1c ≥ 7.5%), non-insulin treated T2DM patients will benefit from a comprehensive, integrated physician/patient intervention using structured SMBG in US primary care practices. Thirty-four practices will be recruited and randomly assigned to an active control group (ACG) that receives enhanced usual care or to an enhanced usual care group plus structured SMBG (STG). A total of 504 patients will be enrolled; eligible patients at each site will be randomly selected using a defined protocol. Anticipated attrition of 20% will yield a sample size of at least 204 per arm, which will provide a 90% power to detect a difference of at least 0.5% in change from baseline in HbA1c values, assuming a common standard deviation of 1.5%. Differences in timing and degree of treatment intensification, cost effectiveness, and changes in patient self-management behaviours, mood, and quality of life (QOL) over time will also be assessed. Analysis of change in HbA1c and other dependent variables over time will be performed using both intent-to-treat and per protocol analyses. Trial results will be available in 2010.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The intervention and trial design builds upon previous research by emphasizing appropriate and collaborative use of SMBG by both patients and physicians. Utilization of per protocol and intent-to-treat analyses facilitates a comprehensive assessment of the intervention. Use of practice site cluster-randomisation reduces the potential for intervention contamination, and inclusion criteria (HbA1c ≥ 7.5%) reduces the possibility of floor effects. Inclusion of multiple dependent variables allows us to assess the broader impact of the intervention, including changes in patient and physician attitudes and behaviours.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials NCT00674986.</p

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

Task shifting to non-physician clinicians for integrated management of hypertension and diabetes in rural Cameroon: a programme assessment at two years

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The burden of non-communicable chronic diseases, such as hypertension and diabetes, increases in sub-Saharan Africa. However, the majority of the rural population does still not have access to adequate care. The objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of integrating care for hypertension and type 2 diabetes by task shifting to non-physician clinician (NPC) facilities in eight rural health districts in Cameroon.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Of the 75 NPC facilities in the area, 69 (87%) received basic equipment and training in hypertension and diabetes care. Effectiveness was assessed after two years on status of equipment, knowledge among trained NPCs, number of newly detected patients, retention of patients under care, treatment cost to patients and changes in blood pressure (BP) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) among treated patients.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Two years into the programme, of 54 facilities (78%) available for re-assessment, all possessed a functional sphygmomanometer and stethoscope (65% at baseline); 96% stocked antihypertensive drugs (27% at baseline); 70% possessed a functional glucose meter and 72% stocked oral anti-diabetics (15% and 12% at baseline). NPCs' performance on multiple-choice questions of the knowledge-test was significantly improved. During a period of two years, trained NPCs initiated treatment for 796 patients with hypertension and/or diabetes. The retention of treated patients at one year was 18.1%. Hypertensive and diabetic patients paid a median monthly amount of 1.4 and 0.7 Euro respectively for their medication. Among hypertensive patients with ≥ 2 documented visits (n = 493), systolic BP decreased by 22.8 mmHg (95% CI: -20.6 to -24.9; p < 0.0001) and diastolic BP by 12.4 mmHg (-10.9 to -13.9; p < 0.0001). Among diabetic patients (n = 79) FPG decreased by 3.4 mmol/l (-2.3 to -4.5; p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The integration of hypertension and diabetes into primary health care of NPC facilities in rural Cameroon was feasible in terms of equipment and training, accessible in terms of treatment cost and showed promising BP- and FPG-trends. However, low case-detection rates per NPC and a very high attrition among patients enrolled into care, limited the effectiveness of the programme.</p