Psychosocial aspects of the usage of modern technologies in diabetes mellitus

This article represents a review of trials on the relationship between the use of modern technologies in the treatment of diabetes, such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and the psychological characteristics of patients. The review includes Russian studies and foreign publications. The analysis showed that the psychological aspects of using CSII are considered more often than CGM. Most Russian authors agree that the use of technology is associated with an increased psychological well-being of patients. Foreign researchers generally agree with the same point of view but also report a weaker correlation. One of the most significant conclusions of this analysis is that the use of modern technologies itself does not guarantee an improved quality of life (QOL) and psychological well-being, but technologies such as CSII and CGM provide patients with opportunities to achieve greater effectiveness in treating diabetes, improving clinical and metabolic parameters and therefore improving QOL. However, the use of these devices, as well as many other technological tools, is associated with certain psychological problems, both in terms of their acquisition and influence on patients’ subjective well-being. Early diagnosis and prevention of such problems should be one of the tasks in preparing patients for the use of modern technologies. A positive effect on both clinical and metabolic indicators as well as on the mental sphere and social life of patients can be achieved only by combining complete training (optimally—according to specialised programmes) with medical support

Standards of specialized diabetes care. Edited by Dedov I.I., Shestakova M.V., Mayorov A.Yu. 9th edition

Dear Colleagues! We are glad to present the 9th Edition (revised) of Standards of Diabetes Care. These evidence-based guidelines were designed to standardize and facilitate diabetes care in all regions of the Russian Federation. The Standards are updated on the regular basis to incorporate new data and relevant recommendations from national and international clinical societies, including World Health Organization Guidelines (WHO, 2011, 2013), International Diabetes Federation (IDF, 2011, 2012, 2013), American Diabetes Association (ADA, 2018, 2019), American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE, 2019), International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD, 2014, 2018) and Russian Association of Endocrinologists (RAE, 2011, 2012, 2015). Current edition of the “Standards” also integrates results of completed randomized clinical trials (ADVANCE, ACCORD, VADT, UKPDS, SAVOR, TECOS, LEADER, EXAMINE, ELIXA, SUSTAIN, DEVOTE, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS, DECLARE, CARMELINA, REWIND, etc.), as well as findings from the national studies of diabetes mellitus (DM), conducted in close partnership with a number of Russian hospitals. Latest data indicates that prevalence of DM in the world increased during the last decade more than two-fold, reaching some 463 million patients by the end of 2019. According to the current estimation by the International Diabetes Federation, 578 million patients will be suffering from diabetes mellitus by by 2030 and 700 million by 2045. Like many other countries, Russian Federation experiences a sharp rise in the prevalence of DM. According to Russian Federal Diabetes Register, there are at least 4 584 575 patients with DM in this country by the end of 2018 (3,1% of population) with 92% (4 238 503) – Type 2 DM, 6% (256 202) – Type 1 DM and 2% (89 870) – other types of DM, including 8 006 women with gestational DM. However, these results underestimates real quantity of patients, because they consider only registered cases. Results of Russian epidemiological study (NATION) con- firmed that only 54% of Type 2 DM are diagnosed. So real number of patients with DM in Russia is 9 million patients (about 6% of population). This is a great long-term problem, because a lot of patients are not diagnosed, so they don’t receive any treatment ant have high risk of vascular complications. Severe consequences of the global pandemics of DM include its vascular complications: nephropathy, retinopathy, coronary, cerebral, coronary and peripheral vascular disease. These conditions are responsible for the majority of cases of diabetes-related disability and death. In сurrent edition of the “Standards”: New goals of glycemic control for the elderly, based on the presence of functional dependence, as well as for pregnant women, children and adolescents, are given. Added a snippet that describes the continuous glucose monitoring. Only low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level is used as a target for lipid metabolism. Proposes more stringent target levels of blood pressure. It also features updated guidelines on stratification of treatment in newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes: the excess of the initial level of HbA1c over the target level was used as a criterion. In the recommendations for the personalization of the choice of antidiabetic agents, it is taken into account that in certain clinical situations (the presence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors, chronic heart failure, chronic kidney disease, obesity, the risk of hypoglycemia) certain classes of hypoglycemic agents (or individual drugs) have proven advantages. Recommendations for psychosocial support are added. The position of metabolic surgery as a method of treatment of DM with morbid obesity is updated. Recommendations for diagnostic and treatment of hypogonadism syndrome in men with DM are added. For the first time, evidence levels of confidence and credibility levels of recommendations for diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative and preventive interventions based on a systematic review of the literature are given in accordance with the recommendations of the Center for Healthcare Quality Assessment and Control of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. This text represents a consensus by the absolute majority of national experts, achieved through a number of fruitful discus- sions held at national meetings and forums. These guidelines are intended for endocrinologists, primary care physicians and other medical professionals involved in the treatment of DM. On behalf of the Working Grou

Standards of specialized diabetes care. Edited by Dedov I.I., Shestakova M.V., Mayorov A.Yu. 10th edition

Dear Colleagues!We are glad to present the 10th Edition (revised) of the Standards of Specialized Diabetes Care. These evidence-based guidelines were designed to standardize and facilitate diabetes care in all regions of the Russian Federation.The Standards are updated on the regular basis to incorporate new data and relevant recommendations from national and international clinical societies, including World Health Organization Guidelines (WHO, 2011, 2013), International Diabetes Federation (IDF, 2011, 2012, 2013), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD 2018, 2019), American Diabetes Association (ADA, 2018, 2019, 2021), American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE, 2020, 2021), International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD, 2018) and Russian Association of Endocrinologists (RAE, 2019). Current edition of the “Standards” also integrates results of completed randomized clinical trials (ADVANCE, ACCORD, VADT, UKPDS, SAVOR, TECOS, LEADER, EXAMINE, ELIXA, SUSTAIN, DEVOTE, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS, DECLARE, CARMELINA, REWIND, CREDENCE, CAROLINA, DAPA-CKD, DAPA-HF, EMPEROR-Reduced trial, VERIFY, VERTIS CV, PIONEER, etc.), as well as findings from the national studies of diabetes mellitus (DM), conducted in close partnership with a number of Russian hospitals.Latest data indicates that prevalence of DM in the world increased during the last decade more than two-fold, reaching some 537 million patients by the end of 2021. According to the current estimation by the International Diabetes Federation, 643 million patients will be suffering from DM by 2030 and 784 million by 2045.Like many other countries, Russian Federation experiences a sharp rise in the prevalence of DM. According to Russian Federal Diabetes Register, there are at least 4 871 863 patients with DM in this country on 01.01.2021 (3,34% of population) with 92,3% (4 498 826)–Type 2 DM, 5,6% (271 468)–Type 1 DM and 2,1% (101 569)–other types of DM, including 9 729 women with gestational DM. However, these results underestimates real quantity of patients, because they consider only registered cases. Results of Russian epidemiological study (NATION) confirmed that only 54% of Type 2 DM are diagnosed. So real number of patients with DM in Russia is 10 million patients (about 7% of population). This is a great long-term problem, because a lot of patients are not diagnosed, so they don’t receive any treatment and have high risk of vascular complications.Severe consequences of the global pandemic of DM include its vascular complications: nephropathy, retinopathy, coronary, cerebral and peripheral vascular disease. These conditions are responsible for the majority of cases of diabetes-related disability and death.In сurrent edition of the “Standards”:New goals of glycemic control for continuous glucose monitoring (time in range, below range and above range, glucose variability) are given.It also features updated guidelines on stratification of treatment in newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes.In the recommendations for the personalization of the choice of antidiabetic agents, it is taken into account that in certain clinical situations (the presence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors, chronic heart failure, chronic kidney disease, obesity, the risk of hypoglycemia) certain classes of hypoglycemic agents (or individual drugs) have proven advantages.Indications for the use of antidiabetic agents in chronic kidney disease are expanded.Information about insulin pump therapy is added.Recommendations on vaccination are added.An algorithm for replacing some insulin preparations with others is given.This text represents a consensus by the absolute majority of national experts, achieved through a number of fruitful discussions held at national meetings and forums. These guidelines are intended for endocrinologists, primary care physicians, pediatricians and other medical professionals involved in the treatment of DM.Compared with previous edition of the Standards of Specialized Diabetes Care edited by Dedov I.I., Shestakova M.V., ­Mayorov A.Yu., 10th edition, Moscow, 2021 (signed for printing on 10.09.2021) a number of changes have been made.On behalf of the Working Grou

Coping strategies in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes patients using insulin: the relationship with emotional well-being and glycaemic control

Background. Over the long disease course of diabetes mellitus (DM), with its demands in terms of everyday self-management of the disease, individual psychological characteristics may be associated with both emotional well-being (WB) and glycaemic control. The former includes various types of coping strategies (CSs) of the patients, which comprise the common ways for patients to overcome difficult situations. Aim. To study the relationships between CS and both glycaemic control and emotional WB in patients with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) and Type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with insulin. Materials and methods. The study included 84 patients with T1D and 56 patients with insulin-treated T2D [age, 22.5 ± 3.3 and 61.0 ± 8.9 years; men/women, 29/55 and 11/45; duration of DM, 11.9 ± 5.36 and 11.6 ± 6.2 years and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), 9.1% ± 2.2% and 9.0% ± 1.4%, respectively]. The HbA1c levels were determined in all patients. The Strategic Approach to Coping Scale constructed by S. Hobfoll was used to study CS, and emotional WB was assessed based on the severity of anxiety and depression. Further, we used the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory developed by C.D. Spielberger and adapted by Y.L. Khanin and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. Only Russian validated versions of the questionnaires were used in the study. Results. In both groups of patients, ‘Assertive (Persistent) Actions’ was positively associated with emotional WB. In patients with T2D, WB increases when using ‘Cautious Action’ and ‘Social Joining’. The deterioration of emotional WB was associated with ‘Aggressive Actions’ in both groups of patients. In patients with T1D, negative WB was also associated with ‘Avoidance’, while in patients with T2D, negative WB was associated with ‘Instinctive Actions’. In patients with T1D, ‘Instinctive Action’ was associated with higher HbA1c levels. In patients with T2D, ‘Cautious Action’, ‘Avoidance’ and ‘Antisocial Action’ were associated with lower HbA1c levels. Conclusion. In patients with T1D and T2D, CSs are associated with both emotional WB and glycaemic control. Emotional WB and lower HbA1c levels are associated with ‘Assertive Action’, ‘Cautious Action’, ‘Avoidance’ and ‘Asocial Action’. Negative WB and higher HbA1c levels are associated with ‘Aggressive Action’ and ‘Instinctive Action’

Insulin resistance and its possible personal stress moderators

Background. Recently, insulin resistance (IR) has been actively investigated by experts in various fields. Here we aim to study the effect of stress on the development of IR. Objective. To study the associations between IR and personal stress moderators (self-attitude, locus of control and coping strategies) as well as the related performance lifestyles. Methods. The study included 63 patients (16 men; mean age, 48.2 11.7 years). Of these participants, 26 were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus, 10 with impaired glucose tolerance, 6 with impaired fasting glucose and 21 with normal glucose tolerance. The levels of HbA1c and IR ratio were determined using HOMA. Well-known psychological assessment questionnaires were used to assess the effect of personal stress moderators. Results. There was a significant relationship between IR and personal stress moderators. A positive self-attitude was associated with a lower risk of IR (p 0.05), which can be explained by a decrease in the risk of developing stress. Assertive coping strategies were most pronounced in subjects with a low level of IR (p 0.05). Personal characteristics also determined an individuals lifestyle, which may have an impact on the increase in IR. There was an association between high levels of IR and unhealthy alimentary preferences (p 0.05). Such preferences were also associated with personal characteristics, such as external locus of control, less positive self-attitude and passive coping strategies (p 0.05). People with high IR rarely engage in a regular physical activity; there was a direct correlation between the frequency of physical activity and assertive coping strategies (p 0.01). Married participants had high levels of IR (p 0.05). Conclusion. There were significant relationships between IR and personal stress moderators, such as self-attitude and coping strategies. Besides the direct effects on stress levels, personality traits may also indirectly increase the risk of IR by influencing the individuals lifestyle. There is a need to investigate the fact that married people have higher levels of IR