Vitamin D prescribing practices among clinical practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background and Aims: COVID-19 has caused devastation globally. Low vitamin D status, particularly during the winter months, remains commonplace around the world, and it is thought to be one of the contributing factors toward causation and severity of COVID-19. Many guidelines do not recommend vitamin D for the treatment or prevention of the disease. Hence, we set out to conduct a global survey to understand the use and prescribing habits of vitamin D among clinicians for COVID-19. Methods: An online anonymous questionnaire was sent to clinicians enquiring about their prescribing habits of vitamin D and personal use of vitamin D. Data of the survey were collected between January 15, 2021, and February 13, 2021. Results: Four thousand four hundred forty practicing clinicians were included in the analysis, with the majority of those responding from Asia, followed by Europe. 82.9% prescribed vitamin D before COVID-19, more commonly among general practitioners (GPs) in comparison with medical specialists, and Asian clinicians were more likely to prescribe vitamin D in comparison with Caucasian physicians (p < 0.01). GPs were also more likely to prescribe vitamin D prophylactically to prevent COVID-19 in comparison with medical specialists (OR 1.47, p < 0.01). Most GPs (72.8%) would also prescribe vitamin D to treat COVID-19 in comparison with medical specialists (OR 1.81, p < 0.01), as well as more Asian in comparison with Caucasian physicians (OR 4.57, p < 0.01). 80.4% of respondents were taking vitamin D, more so in the 45–54 and 65–74 age groups in comparison with the 18–24 years category (OR 2.15 and 2.40, respectively, both p < 0.05), many of whom did so before COVID-19 (72.1%). Conclusion: This survey has shown that many clinicians would prescribe vitamin D for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. The majority would also recommend measuring vitamin D levels, but not so in patients with COVID-19

Determinants of intensive insulin therapeutic regimens in patients with type 1 diabetes: data from a nationwide multicenter survey in Brazil

Background: To evaluate the determinants of intensive insulin regimens (ITs) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).Methods: This multicenter study was conducted between December 2008 and December 2010 in 28 public clinics in 20 Brazilian cities. Data were obtained from 3,591 patients (56.0% female, 57.1% Caucasian). Insulin regimens were classified as follows: group 1, conventional therapy (CT) (intermediate human insulin, one to two injections daily); group 2 (three or more insulin injections of intermediate plus regular human insulin); group 3 (three or more insulin injections of intermediate human insulin plus short-acting insulin analogues); group 4, basal-bolus (one or two insulin injections of long-acting plus short-acting insulin analogues or regular insulin); and group 5, basal-bolus with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Groups 2 to 5 were considered IT groups.Results: We obtained complete data from 2,961 patients. Combined intermediate plus regular human insulin was the most used therapeutic regimen. CSII was used by 37 (1.2%) patients and IT by 2,669 (90.2%) patients. More patients on IT performed self-monitoring of blood glucose and were treated at the tertiary care level compared to CT patients (p < 0.001). the majority of patients from all groups had HbA1c levels above the target. Overweight or obesity was not associated with insulin regimen. Logistic regression analysis showed that economic status, age, ethnicity, and level of care were associated with IT (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Given the prevalence of intensive treatment for T1D in Brazil, more effective therapeutic strategies are needed for long term-health benefits.Farmanguinhos/Fundacao Oswaldo Cruz/National Health MinistryBrazilian Diabetes SocietyFundacao do Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Univ Estado Rio de Janeiro, Unit Diabet, BR-20551030 Rio de Janeiro, BrazilBaurus Diabet Assoc, São Paulo, BrazilFed Univ São Paulo State, Diabet Unit, São Paulo, BrazilFed Univ Hosp Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, BrazilUniv Hosp São Paulo, Diabet Unit, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Fed Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilUniv Fed Ceara, Fortaleza, Ceara, BrazilSanta Casa Misericordia, Belo Horizonte, MG, BrazilSanta Casa Misericordia São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Fed Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, BrazilHosp Geral de Bonsucesso, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilHosp Univ Clementino Fraga Filho IPPMG, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilUniv Hosp São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilFac Ciencias Med Santa Casa São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilUniv São Paulo, Inst Crianca, Hosp Clin, São Paulo, BrazilUniv São Paulo, Fac Med Ribeirao Preto, Hosp Clin, Ribeirao Preto, BrazilAmbulatorio Fac Estadual Med Sao Jose Rio Preto, Ribeirao Preto, BrazilEscola Paulista Med, Ctr Diabet, Ribeirao Preto, BrazilClin Endocrinol Santa Casa Belo Horizonte, Belo Horizonte, MG, BrazilUniv Estadual Londrina, Londrina, BrazilUniv Fed Parana, Hosp Clin, Porto Alegre, RS, BrazilInst Crianca Com Diabet Rio Grande Sul, Rio Grande Do Sul, RS, BrazilGrp Hosp Conceicao, Inst Crianca Com Diabet, Porto Alegre, RS, BrazilHosp Univ Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, SC, BrazilInst Diabet Endocrinol Joinville, Joinville, BrazilHosp Reg Taguatinga, Brasilia, DF, BrazilHosp Geral Goiania, Goiania, Go, BrazilCtr Diabet & Endocrinol Estado Bahia, Goiania, Go, BrazilUniv Fed Maranhao, Sao Luis, BrazilCtr Integrado Diabet & Hipertensao Ceara, Fortaleza, Ceara, BrazilUniv Fed Sergipe, Aracaju, BrazilHosp Univ Alcides Carneiro, Campina Grande, BrazilHosp Univ Joao de Barros Barreto, Belem, Para, BrazilFed Univ São Paulo State, Diabet Unit, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Hosp São Paulo, Diabet Unit, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Hosp São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilEscola Paulista Med, Ctr Diabet, Ribeirao Preto, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Estimating cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes: a national multicenter study in Brazil

<p>Abstract</p> <p>According to Brazilian National Data Survey diabetes is the fifth cause for hospitalization and is one of the ten major causes of mortality in this country.</p> <p>Aims</p> <p>to stratify the estimated cardiovascular risk (eCVR) in a population of type 2 diabetics (T2DM) according to the Framingham prediction equations as well as to determine the association between eCVR with metabolic and clinical control of the disease.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>From 2000 to 2001 a cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in 13 public out-patients diabetes/endocrinology clinics from 8 Brazilian cities. The 10-year risk of developing coronary heart disease (CHD) was estimated by the prediction equations described by Wilson et al (Circulation 1998). LDL equations were preferably used; when patients missed LDL data we used total cholesterol equations instead.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Data from 1382 patients (59.0% female) were analyzed. Median and inter-quartile range (IQ) of age and duration of diabetes were 57.4 (51-65) and 8.8 (3-13) years, respectively without differences according to the gender. Forty-two percent of these patients were overweight and 35.4% were obese (the prevalence of higher BMI and obesity in this T2DM group was significantly higher in women than in men; p < 0.001). The overall estimated eCVR in T2DM patients was 21.4 (13.5-31.3). The eCVR was high (> 20%) in 738 (53.4%), intermediate in 202 (14.6%) and low in 442 (32%) patients. Men [25.1(15.4-37.3)] showed a higher eCVR than women [18.8 (12.4-27.9) p < 0.001]. The most common risk factor was high LDL-cholesterol (80.8%), most frequently found in women than in men (p = 0.01). The median of risk factors present was three (2-4) without gender differences. Overall we observed that 60 (4.3%) of our patients had none, 154(11.1%) one, 310 (22.4%) two, 385 (27.9%) three, 300 (21.7%) four, 149 (10.5%) five and six, (2%) six risk factors. A higher eCVR was noted in overweight or obese patients (p = 0.01 for both groups). No association was found between eCVR with age or a specific type of diabetes treatment. A correlation was found between eCVR and duration of diabetes (p < 0.001), BMI (p < 0.001), creatinine (p < 0.001) and triglycerides levels (p < 0.001) but it was not found with HbA1c, fasting blood glucose and post-prandial glucose. A higher eCVR was observed in patients with retinopathy (p < 0.001) and a tendency in patients with microalbuminuria (p = 0.06). Conclusion: our study showed that in this group of Brazilian T2DM the eCVR was correlated with the lipid profile and it was higher in patients with microvascular chronic complications. No correlation was found with glycemic control parameters. These data could explain the failure of intensive glycemic control programs aiming to reduce cardiovascular events observed in some studies.</p

Regional differences in clinical care among patients with type 1 diabetes in Brazil: Brazilian Type 1 Diabetes Study Group

Background\ud To determine the characteristics of clinical care offered to type 1 diabetic patients across the four distinct regions of Brazil, with geographic and contrasting socioeconomic differences. Glycemic control, prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, screening for chronic complications and the frequency that the recommended treatment goals were met using the American Diabetes Association guidelines were evaluated.\ud \ud Methods\ud This was a cross-sectional, multicenter study conducted from December 2008 to December 2010 in 28 secondary and tertiary care public clinics in 20 Brazilian cities in north/northeast, mid-west, southeast and south regions. The data were obtained from 3,591 patients (56.0% females and 57.1% Caucasians) aged 21.2 ± 11.7 years with a disease duration of 9.6 ± 8.1 years (<1 to 50 years).\ud \ud Results\ud Overall, 18.4% patients had HbA1c levels <7.0%, and 47.5% patients had HbA1c levels ≥ 9%. HbA1c levels were associated with lower economic status, female gender, age and the daily frequency of self-blood glucose monitoring (SBGM) but not with insulin regimen and geographic region. Hypertension was more frequent in the mid-west (32%) and north/northeast (25%) than in the southeast (19%) and south (17%) regions (p<0.001). More patients from the southeast region achieved LDL cholesterol goals and were treated with statins (p<0.001). Fewer patients from the north/northeast and mid-west regions were screened for retinopathy and nephropathy, compared with patients from the south and southeast. Patients from the south/southeast regions had more intensive insulin regimens than patients from the north/northeast and mid-west regions (p<0.001). The most common insulin therapy combination was intermediate-acting with regular human insulin, mainly in the north/northeast region (p<0.001). The combination of insulin glargine with lispro and glulisine was more frequently used in the mid-west region (p<0.001). Patients from the north/northeast region were younger, non-Caucasian, from lower economic status, used less continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, performed less SBGM and were less overweight/obese (p<0.001).\ud \ud Conclusions\ud A majority of patients, mainly in the north/northeast and mid-west regions, did not meet metabolic control goals and were not screened for diabetes-related chronic complications. These results should guide governmental health policy decisions, specific to each geographic region, to improve diabetes care and decrease the negative impact diabetes has on the public health system.We thank Mrs. Karianne Aroeira Davidson, Mrs. Anna Maria Ferreira, Mrs. Elisangela Santos and Sandro Sperandei for their technical assistance.This work was supported by grants from Farmanguinhos/Fundação Oswaldo Cruz/National Health Ministry, the Brazilian Diabetes Society, Fundação do Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico do Brasil

Vitamin D prescribing practices among clinical practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: COVID‐19 has caused devastation globally. Low vitamin D status, particularly during the winter months, remains commonplace around the world, and it is thought to be one of the contributing factors toward causation and severity of COVID‐19. Many guidelines do not recommend vitamin D for the treatment or prevention of the disease. Hence, we set out to conduct a global survey to understand the use and prescribing habits of vitamin D among clinicians for COVID‐19. METHODS: An online anonymous questionnaire was sent to clinicians enquiring about their prescribing habits of vitamin D and personal use of vitamin D. Data of the survey were collected between January 15, 2021, and February 13, 2021. RESULTS: Four thousand four hundred forty practicing clinicians were included in the analysis, with the majority of those responding from Asia, followed by Europe. 82.9% prescribed vitamin D before COVID‐19, more commonly among general practitioners (GPs) in comparison with medical specialists, and Asian clinicians were more likely to prescribe vitamin D in comparison with Caucasian physicians (p < 0.01). GPs were also more likely to prescribe vitamin D prophylactically to prevent COVID‐19 in comparison with medical specialists (OR 1.47, p < 0.01). Most GPs (72.8%) would also prescribe vitamin D to treat COVID‐19 in comparison with medical specialists (OR 1.81, p < 0.01), as well as more Asian in comparison with Caucasian physicians (OR 4.57, p < 0.01). 80.4% of respondents were taking vitamin D, more so in the 45–54 and 65–74 age groups in comparison with the 18–24 years category (OR 2.15 and 2.40, respectively, both p < 0.05), many of whom did so before COVID‐19 (72.1%). CONCLUSION: This survey has shown that many clinicians would prescribe vitamin D for the prevention and treatment of COVID‐19. The majority would also recommend measuring vitamin D levels, but not so in patients with COVID‐19

Insulin Injection Technique Questionnaire: results of an international study comparing Brazil, Latin America and World data

Abstract Background In 2014–2015, the largest international survey of insulin injection technique in patients with diabetes taking insulin was conducted in 42 countries, totaling 13,289 participants. In Brazil, patients from five public health centers were included. This study aims to evaluate insulin injection technique in Brazilian patients and compare results with Latin America (LatAm) and World data. Methods The insulin Injection Technique Questionnaire (ITQ) survey consisted of an initial patient section (questions applied by an experienced nurse), followed by observation of injection technique and examination of the injection sites by the health care professional. Results In Brazil, 255 patients were evaluated: 25% had type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and 75% had T2DM. In this study, 79% of patients injected less than 4 times a day, and 17.3% used insulin pens, compared to 28% in LatAm and 86% worldwide. Syringes were used by 78% of patients in Brazil, compared to 65% in LatAm and 10% globally. Differences in needle length were substantial—nearly 64% in Brazil inject with 8 mm length needle compared to 48% in LatAm and 27% worldwide. Additionally, 48% of patients in Brazil skip doses, 80% reuse pen needles and 57% reuse syringes with 27% having lipohypertrophy by exam. Conclusion Brazilian patients use syringes more and pens less, inject with larger needles and have more lipohypertrophy when compared to Latin America and World data. Their re-use of needles and syringes is also high. This study showed that in Brazil, teaching of proper injection technique has to be more widespread, and more intensive during diabetes educational sessions, and the type of delivered supplies must be updated to smaller, shorter needles preferred by patients, in order to facilitate adherence to treatment. From the ITQ, we conclude that there are many aspects of insulin injection technique that may be improved in Brazil

Short-acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin on postprandial glucose and hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Introduction Strict glucose control using multiple doses of insulin is the standard treatment for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), but increased risk of hypoglycemia is a frequent drawback. Regular insulin in multiple doses is important for achieving strict glycemic control for T1DM, but short-acting insulin analogues may be better in reducing hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose levels. Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effects of short-acting insulin analogues vs regular human insulin on hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose in patients with T1DM. Methods Searches were run on the electronic databases MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, LILACS, and DARE for RCTs published until August 2017. To be included in the study, the RCTs had to cover a minimum period of 4 weeks and had to assess the effects of short-acting insulin analogues vs regular human insulin on hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose levels in patients with T1DM. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the quality of the selected studies. The primary outcomes analyzed were hypoglycemia (total episodes, nocturnal hypoglycemia, and severe hypoglycemia) and postprandial glucose (at all times, after breakfast, after lunch, and after dinner). Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and quality of life were considered secondary outcomes. The risk of bias of each RCT was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias table, while the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the GRADEpro software. The pooled mean difference in the number of hypoglycemic episodes and postprandial glucose between short-acting insulin analogues vs. regular human insulin was calculated using the random-effects model. Results Of the 2897 articles retrieved, 22 (6235 patients) were included. Short-acting insulin analogues were associated with a decrease in total hypoglycemic episodes (risk rate 0.93, 95% CI 0.87–0.99; 6235 patients; I2 = 81%), nocturnal hypoglycemia (risk rate 0.55, 95% CI 0.40–0.76, 1995 patients, I2 = 84%), and severe hypoglycemia (risk rate 0.68, 95% CI 0.60–0.77; 5945 patients, I2 = 0%); and with lower postprandial glucose levels (mean difference/MD − 19.44 mg/dL; 95% CI − 21.49 to − 17.39; 5031 patients, I2 = 69%) and lower HbA1c (MD − 0,13%; IC 95% − 0.16 to − 0.10; 5204 patients; I2 = 73%) levels. Conclusions Short-acting insulin analogues are superior to regular human insulin in T1DM patients for the following outcomes: total hypoglycemic episodes, nocturnal hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, postprandial glucose, and HbA1c