88 research outputs found

    Evaluation of the digital diabetes prevention programme pilot: Uncontrolled mixed-methods study protocol

    Get PDF
    This is the final version. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.Introduction The prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising steeply. National Health Service England (NHSE) is exploring the potential of a digital diabetes prevention programme (DDPP) and has commissioned a pilot with embedded evaluation. Methods and analysis This study aims to determine whether, and if so, how, should NHSE implement a national DDPP, using a mixed-methods pretest and post-test design, underpinned by two theoretical frameworks: the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy of behavioural change techniques for the digital interventions and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for implementation processes. In eight pilot areas across England, adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 42-47 mmol/mol or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) and adults without NDH who are overweight (body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m 2) or obese (BMI >30 kg/m 2) will be referred to one of five digitally delivered diabetes prevention interventions. The primary outcomes are reduction in HbA1c and weight (for people with NDH) and reduction in weight (for people who are overweight or obese) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include use of the intervention, satisfaction, physical activity, patient activation and resources needed for successful implementation. Quantitative data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months by the digital intervention providers. Qualitative data will be collected through semistructured interviews with commissioners, providers, healthcare professionals and patients. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and using generalised linear models to determine whether changes in outcomes are associated with demographic and intervention factors. Qualitative data will be analysed using framework analysis, with data pertaining to implementation mapped onto the CFIR. Ethics and dissemination The study has received ethical approval from the Public Health England Ethics and Research Governance Group (reference R&D 324). Dissemination will include a report to NHSE to inform future policy and publication in peer-reviewed journals.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

    Evaluation of the digital diabetes prevention programme pilot: uncontrolled mixed-methods study protocol

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising steeply. National Health Service England (NHSE) is exploring the potential of a digital diabetes prevention programme (DDPP) and has commissioned a pilot with embedded evaluation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study aims to determine whether, and if so, how, should NHSE implement a national DDPP, using a mixed-methods pretest and post-test design, underpinned by two theoretical frameworks: the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy of behavioural change techniques for the digital interventions and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for implementation processes. In eight pilot areas across England, adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 42-47 mmol/mol or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) and adults without NDH who are overweight (body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m2) or obese (BMI >30 kg/m2) will be referred to one of five digitally delivered diabetes prevention interventions. The primary outcomes are reduction in HbA1c and weight (for people with NDH) and reduction in weight (for people who are overweight or obese) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include use of the intervention, satisfaction, physical activity, patient activation and resources needed for successful implementation. Quantitative data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months by the digital intervention providers. Qualitative data will be collected through semistructured interviews with commissioners, providers, healthcare professionals and patients. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and using generalised linear models to determine whether changes in outcomes are associated with demographic and intervention factors. Qualitative data will be analysed using framework analysis, with data pertaining to implementation mapped onto the CFIR. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the Public Health England Ethics and Research Governance Group (reference R&D 324). Dissemination will include a report to NHSE to inform future policy and publication in peer-reviewed journals

    Twenty-year trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors among people with type 2 diabetes by dementia status in England: a retrospective cohort study.

    Get PDF
    To assess 20-year retrospective trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors preceding dementia diagnosis among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We identified 227,145 people with T2D aged > 42 years between 1999 and 2018. Annual mean levels of eight routinely measured cardio-metabolic factors were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Multivariable multilevel piecewise and non-piecewise growth curve models assessed retrospective trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors by dementia status from up to 19 years preceding dementia diagnosis (dementia) or last contact with healthcare (no dementia). 23,546 patients developed dementia; mean (SD) follow-up was 10.0 (5.8) years. In the dementia group, mean systolic blood pressure increased 16-19 years before dementia diagnosis compared with patients without dementia, but declined more steeply from 16 years before diagnosis, while diastolic blood pressure generally declined at similar rates. Mean body mass index followed a steeper non-linear decline from 11 years before diagnosis in the dementia group. Mean blood lipid levels (total cholesterol, LDL, HDL) and glycaemic measures (fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c) were generally higher in the dementia group compared with those without dementia and followed similar patterns of change. However, absolute group differences were small. Differences in levels of cardio-metabolic factors were observed up to two decades prior to dementia diagnosis. Our findings suggest that a long follow-up is crucial to minimise reverse causation arising from changes in cardio-metabolic factors during preclinical dementia. Future investigations which address associations between cardiometabolic factors and dementia should account for potential non-linear relationships and consider the timeframe when measurements are taken

    Homozygous Hypomorphic HNF1A Alleles Are a Novel Cause of Young-Onset Diabetes and Result in Sulfonylurea-Sensitive Diabetes

    Get PDF
    Objective: Heterozygous loss-of-function mutations in HNF1A cause maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY). Affected individuals can be treated with low-dose sulfonylureas. Individuals with homozygous HNF1A mutations causing MODY have not been reported. Research design and methods: We phenotyped a kindred with young-onset diabetes and performed molecular genetic testing, a mixed meal tolerance test, a sulfonylurea challenge, and in vitro assays to assess variant protein function. Results: A homozygous HNF1A variant (p.A251T) was identified in three insulin-treated family members diagnosed with diabetes before 20 years of age. Those with the homozygous variant had low hs-CRP levels (0.2-0.8 mg/L), and those tested demonstrated sensitivity to sulfonylurea given at a low dose, completely transitioning off insulin. In silico modeling predicted a variant of unknown significance; however, in vitro studies supported a modest reduction in transactivation potential (79% of that for the wild type; P < 0.05) in the absence of endogenous HNF1A. Conclusions: Homozygous hypomorphic HNF1A variants are a cause of HNF1A-MODY. We thus expand the allelic spectrum of variants in dominant genes causing diabetes.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the publisher URL to access it via the publisher's site.This work was undertaken with funds from the Diabetes Research & Wellness Foundation (through a Sutherland-Earl Fellowship 2013–2016) and the Imperial College Healthcare Charity, and with infrastructure support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and Clinical Research Network. S.M. is currently supported by a Future Leaders Mentorship Award from the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. A.J. was a Diabetes UK George Alberti Clinical Research Fellow when contributing to this study. S.E. received a Senior Investigator Award from Wellcome Trust. A.L.G. is a Wellcome Senior Fellow in Basic Biomedical Science. Part of this work was funded in Oxford by the Wellcome Trust (grants 095101 and 200837 [both to A.L.G.]). The research was also funded by the NIHR Oxford and BRC (to A.L.G.).Accepted version, submitted versio

    Living risk prediction algorithm (QCOVID) for risk of hospital admission and mortality from coronavirus 19 in adults: national derivation and validation cohort study.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate a risk prediction algorithm to estimate hospital admission and mortality outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in adults. DESIGN: Population based cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: QResearch database, comprising 1205 general practices in England with linkage to covid-19 test results, Hospital Episode Statistics, and death registry data. 6.08 million adults aged 19-100 years were included in the derivation dataset and 2.17 million in the validation dataset. The derivation and first validation cohort period was 24 January 2020 to 30 April 2020. The second temporal validation cohort covered the period 1 May 2020 to 30 June 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was time to death from covid-19, defined as death due to confirmed or suspected covid-19 as per the death certification or death occurring in a person with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the period 24 January to 30 April 2020. The secondary outcome was time to hospital admission with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Models were fitted in the derivation cohort to derive risk equations using a range of predictor variables. Performance, including measures of discrimination and calibration, was evaluated in each validation time period. RESULTS: 4384 deaths from covid-19 occurred in the derivation cohort during follow-up and 1722 in the first validation cohort period and 621 in the second validation cohort period. The final risk algorithms included age, ethnicity, deprivation, body mass index, and a range of comorbidities. The algorithm had good calibration in the first validation cohort. For deaths from covid-19 in men, it explained 73.1% (95% confidence interval 71.9% to 74.3%) of the variation in time to death (R2); the D statistic was 3.37 (95% confidence interval 3.27 to 3.47), and Harrell's C was 0.928 (0.919 to 0.938). Similar results were obtained for women, for both outcomes, and in both time periods. In the top 5% of patients with the highest predicted risks of death, the sensitivity for identifying deaths within 97 days was 75.7%. People in the top 20% of predicted risk of death accounted for 94% of all deaths from covid-19. CONCLUSION: The QCOVID population based risk algorithm performed well, showing very high levels of discrimination for deaths and hospital admissions due to covid-19. The absolute risks presented, however, will change over time in line with the prevailing SARS-C0V-2 infection rate and the extent of social distancing measures in place, so they should be interpreted with caution. The model can be recalibrated for different time periods, however, and has the potential to be dynamically updated as the pandemic evolves

    Associations of type 1 and type 2 diabetes with COVID-19-related mortality in England: a whole-population study

    Get PDF
    Background: Although diabetes has been associated with COVID-19-related mortality, the absolute and relative risks for type 1 and type 2 diabetes are unknown. We assessed the independent effects of diabetes status, by type, on in-hospital death in England in patients with COVID-19 during the period from March 1 to May 11, 2020. Methods: We did a whole-population study assessing risks of in-hospital death with COVID-19 between March 1 and May 11, 2020. We included all individuals registered with a general practice in England who were alive on Feb 16, 2020. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the effect of diabetes status, by type, on in-hospital death with COVID-19, adjusting for demographic factors and cardiovascular comorbidities. Because of the absence of data on total numbers of people infected with COVID-19 during the observation period, we calculated mortality rates for the population as a whole, rather than the population who were infected. Findings: Of the 61 414 470 individuals who were alive and registered with a general practice on Feb 16, 2020, 263 830 (0·4%) had a recorded diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, 2 864 670 (4·7%) had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, 41 750 (0·1%) had other types of diabetes, and 58 244 220 (94·8%) had no diabetes. 23 698 in-hospital COVID-19-related deaths occurred during the study period. A third occurred in people with diabetes: 7434 (31·4%) in people with type 2 diabetes, 364 (1·5%) in those with type 1 diabetes, and 69 (0·3%) in people with other types of diabetes. Unadjusted mortality rates per 100 000 people over the 72-day period were 27 (95% CI 27–28) for those without diabetes, 138 (124–153) for those with type 1 diabetes, and 260 (254–265) for those with type 2 diabetes. Adjusted for age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, and geographical region, compared with people without diabetes, the odds ratios (ORs) for in-hospital COVID-19-related death were 3·51 (95% CI 3·16–3·90) in people with type 1 diabetes and 2·03 (1·97–2·09) in people with type 2 diabetes. These effects were attenuated to ORs of 2·86 (2·58–3·18) for type 1 diabetes and 1·80 (1·75–1·86) for type 2 diabetes when also adjusted for previous hospital admissions with coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, or heart failure. Interpretation: The results of this nationwide analysis in England show that type 1 and type 2 diabetes were both independently associated with a significant increased odds of in-hospital death with COVID-19

    Risk factors for COVID-19-related mortality in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in England: a population-based cohort study

    Get PDF
    Background: Diabetes has been associated with increased COVID-19-related mortality, but the association between modifiable risk factors, including hyperglycaemia and obesity, and COVID-19-related mortality among people with diabetes is unclear. We assessed associations between risk factors and COVID-19-related mortality in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Methods: We did a population-based cohort study of people with diagnosed diabetes who were registered with a general practice in England. National population data on people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes collated by the National Diabetes Audit were linked to mortality records collated by the Office for National Statistics from Jan 2, 2017, to May 11, 2020. We identified the weekly number of deaths in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes during the first 19 weeks of 2020 and calculated the percentage change from the mean number of deaths for the corresponding weeks in 2017, 2018, and 2019. The associations between risk factors (including sex, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, HbA1c, renal impairment [from estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)], BMI, tobacco smoking status, and cardiovascular comorbidities) and COVID-19-related mortality (defined as International Classification of Diseases, version 10, code U07.1 or U07.2 as a primary or secondary cause of death) between Feb 16 and May 11, 2020, were investigated by use of Cox proportional hazards models. Findings: Weekly death registrations in the first 19 weeks of 2020 exceeded the corresponding 3-year weekly averages for 2017–19 by 672 (50·9%) in people with type 1 diabetes and 16 071 (64·3%) in people with type 2 diabetes. Between Feb 16 and May 11, 2020, among 264 390 people with type 1 diabetes and 2 874 020 people with type 2 diabetes, 1604 people with type 1 diabetes and 36 291 people with type 2 diabetes died from all causes. Of these total deaths, 464 in people with type 1 diabetes and 10 525 in people with type 2 diabetes were defined as COVID-19 related, of which 289 (62·3%) and 5833 (55·4%), respectively, occurred in people with a history of cardiovascular disease or with renal impairment (eGFR &lt;60 mL/min per 1·73 m2). Male sex, older age, renal impairment, non-white ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and previous stroke and heart failure were associated with increased COVID-19-related mortality in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Compared with people with an HbA1c of 48–53 mmol/mol (6·5–7·0%), people with an HbA1c of 86 mmol/mol (10·0%) or higher had increased COVID-19-related mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 2·23 [95% CI 1·50–3·30, p&lt;0·0001] in type 1 diabetes and 1·61 [1·47–1·77, p&lt;0·0001] in type 2 diabetes). In addition, in people with type 2 diabetes, COVID-19-related mortality was significantly higher in those with an HbA1c of 59 mmol/mol (7·6%) or higher than in those with an HbA1c of 48–53 mmol/mol (HR 1·22 [95% CI 1·15–1·30, p&lt;0·0001] for 59–74 mmol/mol [7·6–8·9%] and 1·36 [1·24–1·50, p&lt;0·0001] for 75–85 mmol/mol [9·0–9·9%]). The association between BMI and COVID-19-related mortality was U-shaped: in type 1 diabetes, compared with a BMI of 25·0–29·9 kg/m2, a BMI of less than 20·0 kg/m2 had an HR of 2·45 (95% CI 1·60–3·75, p&lt;0·0001) and a BMI of 40·0 kg/m2 or higher had an HR of 2·33 (1·53–3·56, p&lt;0·0001); the corresponding HRs for type 2 diabetes were 2·33 (2·11–2·56, p&lt;0·0001) and 1·60 (1·47–1·75, p&lt;0·0001). Interpretation: Deaths in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes rose sharply during the initial COVID-19 pandemic in England. Increased COVID-19-related mortality was associated not only with cardiovascular and renal complications of diabetes but, independently, also with glycaemic control and BMI

    Telomere length, antioxidant status and incidence of ischaemic heart disease in type 2 diabetes

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with an increased risk of ischaemic heart disease (IHD). An accelerated process of vascular ageing induced by an increased oxidative stress exposure is suggested as potential pathway accounting for this association. However, no studies have explored the relationship between markers of vascular ageing, measures of oxidative stress and risk of IHD in T2D. OBJECTIVES: To explore the association between plasma antioxidant status, marker of cellular ageing (leukocyte telomere length, LTL) and 10years risk of IHD in patients with T2D. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2002, 489 Caucasians subjects with T2D were enrolled at the diabetic clinic, University College London Hospital. Plasma total anti-oxidant status (TAOS) and LTL were measured by photometric microassay and RT-PCR, respectively. The incidence of IHD over 10years was determined through linkage with the national clinical audit of acute coronary syndrome in UK. RESULTS: At baseline, TAOS was associated with LTL (age adjusted: r=0.106, p=0.024). After 10years, 61 patients developed IHD. Lower TAOS and shorter LTL at baseline predicted an increased IHD risk at follow-up (age adjusted: p=0.033 and p=0.040, respectively). These associations were independent of age, gender, cardiovascular risk factors, circulating levels of CRP and medication differences. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced TAOS and short LTL are interrelated pathways which predict risk of IHD in patients with T2D. Our findings suggest that antioxidant defences are important to maintain telomere integrity, potentially reducing the progression of vascular ageing in patients with T2D
    corecore