Is glycemia control in Canadians with diabetes individualized? A cross-sectional observational study

Michael J Coons, Michelle Greiver, Babak Aliarzadeh, Christopher Meaney, Rahim Moineddin, Tyler Williamson, John Queenan, Catherine H Yu, David G White, Tara Kiran, Jennifer J Kane, Michael J Coons, Michelle Greiver, Babak Aliarzadeh, Christopher Meaney, Rahim Moineddin, Tyler Williamson, John Queenan, Catherine H Yu, David G White, Tara Kiran, Jennifer J Kane

Abstract

Objective: Diabetes guidelines recommend individualized glycemic targets: tighter control in younger, healthier patients and consideration of more moderate control in the elderly and those with coexisting illnesses. Our objective was to examine whether glycemic control varied by age and comorbidities in Canadian primary care.

Research design and methods: Cross-sectional study using data from the electronic medical records of 537 primary care providers across Canada; 30 416 patients with diabetes, aged 40 or above, with at least one encounter and one hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013. The outcome was the most recent HbA1c, categorized into three levels of control: tight (<7.0% or <53 mmol/mol), moderate (7.0%-8.5%, 53 mmol/mol-69.5 mmol/mol) and uncontrolled (>8.5% or >69.5 mmol/mol). We adjusted for several factors associated with glycemic control including treatment intensity.

Results: Younger patients (aged 40-49) were more likely to have moderate as opposed to tight control than the older patients (aged 80+) (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.49, p=0.001). The youngest were also more likely to have uncontrolled as opposed to moderately controlled glycemia (OR 3.39; 95% CI 2.75 to 4.17, p<0.0001). Patients with no or only one comorbidity were more likely to have moderate as opposed to tight control than those with three or more comorbidities (OR 1.66;95% CI 1.46 to 1.90, p<0.0001).

Conclusions: Levels of glycemic control, given age and comorbidities appear to differ from guideline recommendations. Research is needed to understand these discrepancies and develop methods to assist providers in personalizing glycemic targets.

Keywords: Aged; Cross-Sectional studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy; Hemoglobin A.Glycosylated; Primary Health Care.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: MG holds an investigator award from the Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto.

References

    1. Cheng AY; Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee. Canadian Diabetes Association 2013 clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Introduction. Can J Diabetes 2013;37 Suppl 1:S1–S212.10.1016/j.jcjd.2013.01.009
    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014;2014:S14–S80.10.2337/dc14-S014
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association 2008. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2008;32.
    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes – 2011. Diabetes Care 2011;34 Suppl 1:S11–S61.10.2337/dc11-S011
    1. Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J, et al. . Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2560–72.
    1. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al. . Glucose control and vascular complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009;360:129–39.10.1056/NEJMoa0808431
    1. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al. . Action to control cardiovascular risk in Diabetes Study Group: effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2545–59.
    1. Boussageon R, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Saadatian-Elahi M, et al. . Effect of intensive glucose lowering treatment on all cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and microvascular events in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2011;343:d4169.10.1136/bmj.d4169
    1. Kirkman MS, Briscoe VJ, Clark N, et al. . Diabetes in older adults. Diabetes Care 2012;35:2650–64.
    1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. . Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 2012;35:1364–79.10.2337/dc12-0413
    1. Fox CS, Golden SH, Anderson C, et al. . Update on prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus in light of recent evidence: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 2015;38:1777–803.10.2337/dci15-0012
    1. Laiteerapong N, John PM, Nathan AG, et al. . Public health implications of recommendations to individualize glycemic targets in adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2013;36:84–9.10.2337/dc11-2344
    1. Teoh H, Braga MF, Casanova A, et al. . Patient age, ethnicity, medical history, and risk factor profile, but not drug insurance coverage, predict successful attainment of glycemic targets: Time 2 Do More Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (T2DM QUERI). Diabetes Care 2010;33:2558–60.10.2337/dc10-0440
    1. Stark Casagrande S, Fradkin JE, Saydah SH, et al. . The prevalence of meeting A1C, blood pressure, and LDL goals among people with diabetes, 1988-2010. Diabetes Care 2013;36:2271–9.10.2337/dc12-2258
    1. Lipska KJ, Ross JS, Miao Y, et al. . Potential overtreatment of diabetes mellitus in older adults with tight glycemic control. JAMA Intern Med 2015;175:356–62.10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7345
    1. Birtwhistle R, Keshavjee K, Lambert-Lanning A, et al. . Building a pan-Canadian primary care sentinel surveillance network: initial development and moving forward. J Am Board Fam Med 2009;22:412–22.10.3122/jabfm.2009.04.090081
    1. Primary health care intelligence: 2013 progress report of the Canadian primary care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN). Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University, 2013.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. . The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 2014;12:1495–9.10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013
    1. Birtwhistle RV. Canadian primary care Sentinel Surveillance Network: a developing resource for family medicine and public health. Can Fam Physician 2011;57:1219–20.
    1. Queenan JA, Williamson T, Khan S, et al. . Representativeness of patients and providers in the canadian primary care Sentinel Surveillance Network: a cross-sectional study. CMAJ Open 2016;4:E28–E32.10.9778/cmajo.20140128
    1. National Physician Survey 2014, capture of patient information (article online). 2014. (accessed 06 Apr 2015).
    1. Williamson T, Green ME, Birtwhistle R, et al. . Validating the 8 CPCSSN case definitions for chronic disease surveillance in a primary care database of electronic health records. Ann Fam Med 2014;12:367–72.10.1370/afm.1644
    1. Harper W, Clement M, Goldenberg R, et al. . Canadian Diabetes Association 2013. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and mManagement of diabetes in Canada: pharmacologic management of type 2 diabetes. Can J Diabetes 2013:S61–S68.
    1. Drug schedules to the pharmacy operations and drug scheduling act of British Columbia (article online). 2012. (accessed 17 July 2015).
    1. de Vries ST, Voorham J, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, et al. . Potential overtreatment and undertreatment of diabetes in different patient age groups in primary care after the introduction of performance measures. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1312–20.10.2337/dc13-1861
    1. Choosing wisely: American Geriatrics Society (article online). 2015. (accessed 10 Aug 2015).
    1. Lin PJ, Kent DM, Winn A, et al. . Multiple chronic conditions in type 2 diabetes mellitus: prevalence and consequences. Am J Manag Care 2015;21:e23–34.
    1. Krein SL, Bingham CR, McCarthy JF, et al. . Diabetes treatment among VA patients with comorbid serious mental illness. Psychiatr Serv 2006;57:1016–21.10.1176/ps.2006.57.7.1016
    1. Hayward RA, Reaven PD, Wiitala WL, et al. . Follow-up of glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2197–206.10.1056/NEJMoa1414266
    1. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Ismail-Beigi F, et al. . Effects of intensive glycaemic control on ischaemic heart disease: analysis of data from the randomised, controlled ACCORD trial. Lancet 2014;384:1936–41.10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60611-5
    1. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, et al. . 10-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1577–89.10.1056/NEJMoa0806470
    1. Marso SP, Daniels GH, Brown-Frandsen K, et al. . Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2016;375:311–22.10.1056/NEJMoa1603827
    1. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, et al. . Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2117–28.10.1056/NEJMoa1504720
    1. Vijan S, Sussman JB, Yudkin JS, et al. . Effect of patients' risks and preferences on health gains with plasma glucose level lowering in type 2 diabetes mellitus. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1227–34.10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.2894
    1. Boulin M, Diaby V, Tannenbaum C. Preventing unnecessary costs of drug-induced hypoglycemia in older adults with type 2 diabetes in the United States and Canada. PLoS One 2016;11:e016295110.1371/journal.pone.0162951

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit