Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 103
Filter
1.
BMJ Sex Reprod Health ; 48(2): 123-127, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1784853

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is the diagnostic and prognostic standard for clinical management of diabetes mellitus (DM). Unfortunately, patient adherence to guidelines for routine testing can be poor and there are significant gender-based disparities in DM management and outcomes. Recent evidence suggests that menstrual blood may be comparable to systemic blood for monitoring of common biomarkers. The objective of the present study was to assess the concordance of HbA1c levels between menstrual and systemic blood in healthy women and women with diabetes of reproductive age. METHODS: In this prospective, observational cohort study, we enrolled healthy and diabetic (type 1 and type 2 DM) reproductive-age women (aged ≥18 and ≤45 years). Menstrual blood and venous systemic blood specimens were simultaneously obtained at time of menstruation, and analysed for HbA1c levels. Participants self-collected menstrual blood using a QPad, a novel, modified menstrual pad with an embedded dried blood spot strip. RESULTS: Among 172 participants, 57.6% were healthy and 42.4% had a diagnosis of either type 1 or type 2 DM. There were no significant differences in mean HbA1c values in menstrual and systemic blood across the overall cohort or within the diabetic subgroup. Furthermore, HbA1c levels between blood sources were robustly correlated and demonstrated a significant linear relationship. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong concordance in HbA1c levels between menstrual and systemic blood. Empowered by self-collection technologies, these findings suggest that menstrual blood may serve as a reliable, non-invasive and potentially cost-effective alternative to serum for HbA1c monitoring among reproductive-age women with DM.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glycemic Control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Prospective Studies
2.
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care ; 10(2)2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1779347

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc pooled analysis of four real-world studies (SURE Canada, Denmark/Sweden, Switzerland and UK) aimed to characterize the use of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Semaglutide Real-world Evidence (SURE) studies had a duration of ~30 weeks. Changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight (BW) were analyzed for the overall population and the following baseline subgroups: GLP-1RA-naïve/GLP-1RA switchers; body mass index <25/≥25-<30/≥30-<35/≥35 kg/m2; age <65/≥65 years; HbA1c <7%/≥7-≤8%/>8-≤9%/>9%; T2D duration <5/≥5-<10/≥10 years. Data for patients achieving treatment targets were analyzed in the overall population and the baseline HbA1c ≥7% subgroup. RESULTS: Of 1212 patients, 960 were GLP-1RA-naïve and 252 had switched to semaglutide from another GLP-1RA. In the overall population, HbA1c was reduced from baseline to end of study (EOS) by -1.1% point and BW by -4.7 kg; changes were significant for all subgroups. There were significantly larger reductions of HbA1c and BW in GLP-1RA-naïve versus GLP-1RA switchers and larger reductions in HbA1c for patients with higher versus lower baseline HbA1c. At EOS, 52.6% of patients in the overall population achieved HbA1c <7%. No new safety concerns were identified in any of the completed SURE studies. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis, patients with T2D initiating OW semaglutide showed significant improvements from baseline to EOS in HbA1c and BW across various baseline subgroups, including patients previously treated with a GLP-1RA other than semaglutide, supporting OW semaglutide use in clinical practice. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03457012; NCT03631186; NCT03648281; NCT03876015.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Aged , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Glucagon-Like Peptides/therapeutic use , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use
3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(7)2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1776204

ABSTRACT

Meal replacement (MR) is widely used in weight and diabetes management programs due to its ease of compliance and handling. However, little is known about its impact on outcomes other than glycaemic control and weight loss. Furthermore, not many studies evaluate its cost-effectiveness and sustainability. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a diabetes-specific MR for the weight reduction and glycaemic controls of overweight and obese T2DM patients, as compared to routine dietary consultation. Other health outcomes, the cost effectiveness, and the sustainability of the MR will also be evaluated. Materials and Methods: This randomised controlled clinical trial will involve 156 participants who have been randomised equally into the intervention and control groups. As a baseline, both groups will receive diet consultation. Additionally, the intervention group will receive an MR to replace one meal for 5 days a week. The duration of intervention will be 12 weeks, with 36 weeks of follow-up to monitor the sustainability of the MR. The primary endpoints are weight and Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduction, while the secondary endpoints are anthropometry, biochemical measurements, satiety, hormone changes, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on study design is also discussed in this paper. This study has obtained human ethics approval from RECUKM (JEP-2019-566) and is registered at the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR ID: TCTR20210921004).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Obesity , Overweight , Pandemics , Quality of Life , Weight Loss
4.
Diabetes Metab J ; 46(2): 260-272, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1732345

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Abrupt implementation of lockdowns during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the management of diabetes mellitus in patients worldwide. Limited access to health facilities and lifestyle changes potentially affected metabolic parameters in patients at risk. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine any differences in the control of metabolic parameters in patients with diabetes, before and during lockdown. METHODS: We performed searches of five databases. Meta-analyses were carried out using random- or fixed-effect approaches to glycaemic control parameters as the primary outcome: glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), random blood glucose (RBG), fasting blood glucose (FBG), time-in-range (TIR), time-above-range (TAR), time-below-range (TBR). Mean difference (MD), confidence interval (CI), and P value were calculated. Lipid profile was a secondary outcome and is presented as a descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies enrolling a total of 3,992 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM) were included in the study. Patients with T1DM showed a significant improvement of TIR and TAR (MD=3.52% [95% CI, 0.29 to 6.74], I2=76%, P=0.03; MD=-3.36% [95% CI, -6.48 to -0.25], I2=75%, P=0.03), while FBG among patients with T2DM significantly worsened (MD=3.47 mg/dL [95% CI, 1.22 to 5.73], I2=0%, P<0.01). No significant difference was found in HbA1c, RBG, and TBR. Use of continuous glucose monitoring in T1DM facilitated good glycaemic control. Significant deterioration of lipid parameters during lockdown, particularly triglyceride, was observed. CONCLUSION: Implementation of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic did not worsen glycaemic control in patients with diabetes. Other metabolic parameters improved during lockdown, though lipid parameters, particularly triglyceride, worsened.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Triglycerides
5.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 12: 777130, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1662576

ABSTRACT

Objective: To identify clinical and biochemical characteristics associated with 7- & 30-day mortality and intensive care admission amongst diabetes patients admitted with COVID-19. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a cohort study collecting data from medical notes of hospitalised people with diabetes and COVID-19 in 7 hospitals within the Mersey-Cheshire region from 1 January to 30 June 2020. We also explored the impact on inpatient diabetes team resources. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed and optimised by splitting the dataset into a training, test, and validation sets, developing a robust predictive model for the primary outcome. Results: We analyzed data from 1004 diabetes patients (mean age 74.1 (± 12.6) years, predominantly men 60.7%). 45% belonged to the most deprived population quintile in the UK. Median BMI was 27.6 (IQR 23.9-32.4) kg/m2. The primary outcome (7-day mortality) occurred in 24%, increasing to 33% by day 30. Approximately one in ten patients required insulin infusion (9.8%). In univariate analyses, patients with type 2 diabetes had a higher risk of 7-day mortality [p < 0.05, OR 2.52 (1.06, 5.98)]. Patients requiring insulin infusion had a lower risk of death [p = 0.02, OR 0.5 (0.28, 0.9)]. CKD in younger patients (<70 years) had a greater risk of death [OR 2.74 (1.31-5.76)]. BMI, microvascular and macrovascular complications, HbA1c, and random non-fasting blood glucose on admission were not associated with mortality. On multivariate analysis, CRP and age remained associated with the primary outcome [OR 3.44 (2.17, 5.44)] allowing for a validated predictive model for death by day 7. Conclusions: Higher CRP and advanced age were associated with and predictive of death by day 7. However, BMI, presence of diabetes complications, and glycaemic control were not. A high proportion of these patients required insulin infusion warranting increased input from the inpatient diabetes teams.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/mortality , Receptors, Immunologic/blood , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Glucose/analysis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/virology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , United Kingdom/epidemiology
6.
Diabetes Metab Syndr ; 16(2): 102407, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1634135

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glycemic control in critical illness has been linked to outcomes. We sought to investigate if COVID pneumonia was causing disrupted glycemic control compared to historically similar diseases. METHODS: At Intermountain Healthcare, a 23-hospital healthcare system in the intermountain west, we performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. We compared 13,268 hospitalized patients with COVID pneumonia to 6673 patients with non -COVID-pneumonia. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 were younger had fewer comorbidities, had lower mortality and greater length of hospital stay. Our regression models demonstrated that daily insulin dose, indexed for weight, was associated with COVID-19, age, diabetic status, HgbA1c, admission SOFA, ICU length of stay and receipt of corticosteroids. There was significant interaction between a diagnosis of diabetes and having COVID-19. Time in range for our IV insulin protocol was not correlated with having COVID after adjustment. It was correlated with ICU length of stay, diabetic control (HgbA1C) and prior history of diabetes. Among patients with subcutaneous (SQ) insulin only percent of glucose checks in range was correlated with diabetic status, having Covid-19, HgbA1c, total steroids given and Elixhauser comorbidity score even when controlled for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who receive insulin for glycemic control require both more SQ and IV insulin than the non-COVID-19 pneumonia counterparts. Patients with COVID-19 who received SQ insulin only had a lower percent of glucose checks in range.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Glycemic Control/statistics & numerical data , Hyperglycemia/epidemiology , Pneumonia/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , COVID-19/blood , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycemic Control/methods , Hospitalization , Humans , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/blood , Retrospective Studies
7.
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) ; 62(1): 214-217, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1608659

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists can optimize outcomes related to type-2 diabetes (T2D) by taking advantage of telehealth opportunities despite the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Public Health Emergency (PHE). OBJECTIVE: Identify and compare changes in T2D outcomes before (August 2019 through February 2020) and during (March 2020 through October 2020) the COVID-19 PHE. Secondary objectives were to identify and compare pay-for-performance metrics and additional fee-for-service submitted in these patients. METHODS: This study examined changes in T2D outcomes at one primary care office within a community health system. Pharmacists started regularly using Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) services during the COVID-19 PHE to reduce in-person visits. Patients with an initial glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) greater than or equal to 8% were included. Data collected included comorbidities, change in A1C, and diabetes and statin medication therapy adherence. Percentage of Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) and Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) measures were met, and billing code frequencies were also assessed. RESULTS: In the pre-COVID-19 PHE group (N = 30), the average 3- and 6-month A1C reductions were 1.3% and 1.2%, respectively, and the reductions were 2.0% and 2.2% in the during-COVID-19 PHE group (N = 61). The percentage of patients appropriately initiated or maintained on statins was 96.2% in the pre-COVID-19 PHE group versus 82.6% in the during-COVID-19 PHE group. Related to HEDIS, statin adherence was 95.2% in the pre-COVID-19 PHE group and 84.2% in the during-COVID-19 PHE group, and A1C control was 41.7% versus 54%, respectively. A1C control related to MIPS was 60% before COVID-19 PHE versus 73.8% during the COVID-19 PHE. Diabetes medication adherence related to HEDIS and medication reconciliation related to MIPS was 100% for both groups. CONCLUSION: Data demonstrate the opportunity for pharmacists to maintain and improve clinical outcomes related to T2D despite the ongoing COVID-19 PHE through implementation of telephonic monitoring.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Telemedicine , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Pharmacists , Reimbursement, Incentive , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Intern Med ; 61(1): 37-48, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604725

ABSTRACT

Objective In this study, we investigated whether and how the COVID-19 pandemic affected glycemic control and blood pressure (BP) control in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods DM patients whose HbA1c level was measured regularly before and after the declaration of a state of emergency were included in this study. Some patients were given questionnaires about changes in their lifestyle to determine the factors affecting glycemic control and BP control. Results The median HbA1c level of the 804 patients increased significantly from 6.8% before the state of emergency to 7.1% and 7.0% during and after the state of emergency, respectively. This was in contrast to the decrease one year earlier due to seasonal variations. In the 176 patients who responded to the questionnaire, the HbA1c level also increased significantly during and after the state of emergency. The worsening of glycemic control was more pronounced in the group that had achieved HbA1c of <7% before the state of emergency than in those with higher values. Unlike the rise in HbA1c, the BP did not rise during the state of emergency but did rise significantly afterwards. There was no marked decrease in HbA1c or BP after the state of emergency, even in patients who responded that they were much more careful with their diet, ate less, or exercised more. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic worsened glycemic control and BP control, even in patients who perceived no marked change in their diet or exercise, suggesting that more active lifestyle guidance is necessary for good treatment of DM patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Diabetes Mellitus , Blood Glucose , Blood Pressure , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycemic Control , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Diabetes Technol Ther ; 24(2): 102-112, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1594896

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate whether telemetric continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in hospitalized and isolated patients with diabetes mellitus and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with better glycemic outcomes and fewer patient health care worker contacts compared to blood glucose monitoring by traditional point-of-care (POC) glucose testing and to investigate the user aspect of implementing a CGM-system in-hospital. Materials and Methods: A randomized controlled exploratory trial was performed on hospitalized and isolated patients with diabetes and COVID-19 from May 2020 until February 2021 at Nordsjællands Hospital, Denmark. Participants were randomized to nonblinded telemetric CGM (as the only glucose monitoring method) or traditional POC glucose testing + blinded CGM. The primary endpoint was time in range (TIR) based on CGM data in both groups. A questionnaire about the user aspect of the CGM system was answered by health care personnel (HCP). Results: We included 64 participants in the analysis, 31 in the CGM group and 33 in the POC glucose group. TIR median was 46% for the CGM group and 68% for the POC glucose group (P = 0.368). The mean glucose value for the CGM group was 11.1 and 10.8 mmol/L in the POC glucose group (P = 0.372). CGM was associated with fewer POC glucose measurements (P < 0.001). Out of 30 HCPs, 28 preferred telemetric CGM over POC glucose testing. Conclusion: Remote glucose monitoring by CGM did not improve glycemic outcomes compared to traditional POC glucose testing, but was associated with fewer patient-personnel contacts, saving time for HCPs performing diabetes-related tasks. Most HCPs preferred CGM. The study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT04430608).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Blood Glucose , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Denmark , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Insulin , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
10.
BMJ Open ; 11(12): e047037, 2021 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1595822

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In the management of type 2 diabetes, autonomy-supporting interventions may be a prerequisite to achieving more long-term improvement. Preliminary evidence has shown that the guided self-determination (GSD) method might have an effect on haemoglobin A1c and diabetes distress in people with type 1 diabetes. Previous trials were at risk of uncertainty. Thus, the objective is to investigate the benefits and harms of a GSD intervention versus an attention control group intervention in adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This trial protocol is guided by the The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for International Trials Statement. We describe the protocol for a pragmatic randomised, dual-centre, parallel-group, superiority clinical trial testing a GSD intervention versus an attention control for people with type 2 diabetes in outpatient clinics. The participants (n=224) will be recruited from two diverse regions of Denmark. The experimental stepped-care intervention will consist of three to five GSD sessions lasting up to 1 hour with a trained GSD facilitator. The sessions will be conducted face to face, by video conference or over the telephone. The attention controls will receive three to five sessions lasting up to an hour with a communication-trained healthcare professional provided face to-face, by video conference, or over the telephone. Participants will be included if they have type 2 diabetes,>18 years old, are not pregnant. Participants will be assessed before randomisation, at 5-month, and 12-month follow-up, the latter being the primary. The primary outcome is diabetes distress. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, depressive symptoms and non-serious adverse events. Exploratory outcomes are haemoglobin A1c, motivation and serious adverse events. Data will be collected using REDCap and analysed using Stata V.16. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol, the Helsinki Declaration in its latest form, International Harmonisation of Good Clinical Practice guidelines and the applicable regulatory requirement(s). The trial has been approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (P-2020-864). The Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark reviewed the trial protocol, but exempted the trial protocol from full review (H-20003638). The results of the trial will be presented at the outpatient clinics treating people with type 2 diabetes, at national and international conferences as well as to associations for people with diabetes and their relatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04601311.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Adolescent , Adult , Ambulatory Care Facilities , Attention , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Pregnancy , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
11.
Diabet Med ; 39(4): e14774, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1583592

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Evidence suggests that some people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) experience temporary instability of blood glucose (BG) levels after COVID-19 vaccination. We aimed to assess this objectively. METHODS: We examined the interstitial glucose profile of 97 consecutive adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T1DM using the FreeStyle Libre® flash glucose monitor in the periods immediately before and after their first COVID-19 vaccination. The primary outcome measure was percentage (%) interstitial glucose readings within the target range 3.9-10 mmol/L for 7 days prior to the vaccination and the 7 days after the vaccination. Data are mean ± standard error. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the % interstitial glucose on target (3.9-10.0) for the 7 days following vaccination (mean 52.2% ± 2.0%) versus pre-COVID-19 vaccination (mean 55.0% ± 2.0%) (p = 0.030). 58% of individuals with T1DM showed a reduction in the 'time in target range' in the week after vaccination. 30% showed a decrease of time within the target range of over 10%, and 10% showed a decrease in time within target range of over 20%. The change in interstitial glucose proportion on target in the week following vaccination was most pronounced for people taking metformin/dapagliflozin + basal bolus insulin (change -7.6%) and for people with HbA1c below the median (change -5.7%). CONCLUSION: In T1DM, we have shown that initial COVID-19 vaccination can cause temporary perturbation of interstitial glucose, with this effect more pronounced in people talking oral hypoglycaemic medication plus insulin, and when HbA1c is lower.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Glycemic Control , Vaccination , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Glycemic Control/methods , Glycemic Control/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
12.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 24(3): 499-510, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1570592

ABSTRACT

AIM: To determine the risk of adverse outcomes across the spectrum of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels among hospitalized COVID-19 patients with and without diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Danish nationwide registries were used to study the association between HbA1c levels and 30-day risk of all-cause mortality and the composite of severe COVID-19 infection, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and all-cause mortality. The study population comprised patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (3 March 2020 to 31 December 2020) with a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test and an available HbA1c ≤ 6 months before the first positive PCR test. All patients had at least 30 days of follow-up. Among patients with diabetes, HbA1c was categorized as <48 mmol/mol, 48 to 53 mmol/mol, 54 to 58 mmol/mol, 59 to 64 mmol/mol (reference) and >64 mmol/mol. Among patients without diabetes, HbA1c was stratified into <31 mmol/mol, 31 to 36 mmol/mol (reference), 37 to 41 mmol/mol and 42 to 47 mmol/mol. Thirty-day standardized absolute risks and standardized absolute risk differences are reported. RESULTS: We identified 3295 hospitalized COVID-19 patients with an available HbA1c (56.2% male, median age 73.9 years), of whom 35.8% had diabetes. The median HbA1c was 54 and 37 mmol/mol among patients with and without diabetes, respectively. Among patients with diabetes, the standardized absolute risk difference of the composite outcome was higher with HbA1c < 48 mmol/mol (12.0% [95% confidence interval {CI} 3.3% to 20.8%]) and HbA1c > 64 mmol/mol (15.1% [95% CI 6.2% to 24.0%]), compared with HbA1c 59 to 64 mmol/mol (reference). Among patients without diabetes, the standardized absolute risk difference of the composite outcome was greater with HbA1c < 31 mmol/mol (8.5% [95% CI 0.5% to 16.5%]) and HbA1c 42 to 47 mmol/mol (6.7% [95% CI 1.3% to 12.1%]), compared with HbA1c 31 to 36 mmol/mol (reference). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 and HbA1c < 48 mmol/mol or HbA1c > 64 mmol/mol had a higher associated risk of the composite outcome. Similarly, among patients without diabetes, varying HbA1c levels were associated with higher risk of the composite outcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Aged , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Arch Pediatr ; 29(1): 27-29, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561682

ABSTRACT

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced governments to impose lockdown policies, thus impacting patients with chronic diseases, such as type 1 diabetes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of lockdown on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients using a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion device during the nationwide lockdown. Children and adolescents aged 2-18 years followed up at the Pediatric Endocrinology Unit of Hospitalar São João in Portugal were included in the study. We collected data on the age, weight, insulin doses, and glycemic control of the patients before and after the restrictions. RESULTS: The study included 100 patients, 59 males, with a mean age of 12.5 years. Baseline data showed a suboptimal glycemic control with a median HbA1c of 7.9%. The lockdown was associated with an increase in the body mass index (BMI) of all patients (p = 0.009), particularly girls and older teenagers. Metabolic control deteriorated in the 10-13 age group (p = 0.03), with a 0.4% increase in HbA1c. CONCLUSION: To date, this is the largest study on the impact of lockdown on type 1 diabetes in patients using an insulin pump. The results highlight the importance of physical activity, parental supervision, and continuation of healthcare assistance through telemedicine in young individuals with type 1 diabetes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Glycemic Control/methods , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Pandemics/prevention & control , Quarantine , Adolescent , Blood Glucose , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Infusions, Subcutaneous , Insulin Infusion Systems/adverse effects , Male , Portugal/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Prim Care Diabetes ; 15(6): 910-917, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540896

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical and laboratory predictors of adverse clinical course and death in COVID-19 patients urgently need to be identified. So far, the association between HbA1c and in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 remains a controversial issue. The aim of this study is to analyze predictive value of HbA1c for adverse prognosis in COVID-19. METHODS: Both Chinese and English databases were systematically searched using specific keywords associated with the aims until November 21th, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment. A Statistical analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 15.1. RESULTS: Nine clinical trials were included in this study involving 2577 subjects. The results indicate that the association between elevated HbA1c referred as a continuous variable and adverse prognosis of COVID-19 was not significant (OR, 1.02; 95%CI, 0.95-1.09). However, higher HbA1c levels regarded as a dichotomous variable contributed to an increase mortality of COVID-19 (OR, 2.300; 95%CI, 1.679-3.150). Results were stable in a sensitivity analysis. More studies are needed to demonstrate the effect of HbA1c on hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Prolonged uncontrolled hyperglycemia increases the risk of adverse prognosis in COVID-19. Patients with higher HbA1c should be monitored strictly to minimize the risk of adverse prognosis in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Hospitals , Humans , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2
16.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0260389, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1533422

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In recent non-pandemic periods, tuberculosis (TB) has been the leading killer worldwide from a single infectious disease. Patients with DM are three times more likely to develop active TB and poor treatment outcomes. Single glycemic measurements at TB diagnosis may inaccurately diagnose or mischaracterize DM severity. Data are limited regarding glycemic dynamics from TB diagnosis through treatment. METHODS: Prospective study of glycemia dynamics in response to TB treatment measured glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients presenting to TB screening centres in Bangladesh to determine the prevalence and risk factors of hyperglycemia before and at TB treatment completion. RESULTS: 429 adults with active TB disease were enrolled and divided into groups based on history of DM and initial HbA1c range: normoglycemia, prediabetes, and DM. DM was diagnosed in 37%. At treatment completion,14(6%) patients from the normoglycemia and prediabetes groups had HbA1c>6.5%, thus increasing the prevalence of DM to 39%. The number needed to screen to diagnose one new case of DM at TB diagnosis was 5.7 and 16 at treatment completion in the groups without DM. Weight gain>5% at treatment completion significantly increased the risk of hyperglycemia in the groups without DM at TB diagnosis (95% CI 1.23-26.04, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: HbA1c testing prior to and at TB treatment completion found a high prevalence of prediabetes and DM, including a proportion found at treatment completion and commonly in people with a higher percentage of weight gain. Further longitudinal research is needed to understand the effects of TB disease and treatment on insulin resistance and DM complications.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Hyperglycemia/diagnosis , Prediabetic State/diagnosis , Tuberculosis/complications , Adolescent , Adult , Bangladesh/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Disease Management , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hyperglycemia/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prediabetic State/blood , Prediabetic State/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Tuberculosis/therapy , Young Adult
17.
Salud Publica Mex ; 63(6, Nov-Dic): 725-733, 2021 Nov 05.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1535012

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed), glycemic control in Mexico, and its associated factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from Ensanut 2018 (n=12 648) and 2020 (n=2 309). We defined diabetes as fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl or HbA1c≥6.5% or previously diagnosed; glycemic control was defined as HbA1c<7%. We fitted Poisson regression models to assess the association between diabetes, glycemic control, and potential associated factors. RESULTS: The total prevalence of diabetes was 16.8% in 2018 and 15.7% in 2020. In 2018, 38% of adults with diabetes were unaware of their disease, while in 2020 this figure was 29%. Glycemic control was observed in 42% of participants in 2018 and 39% in 2020. Longer disease duration was associated with lower glycemic control, while older age, having a diet, and being affiliated to IMSS, Pemex, Sedena, or private healthcare were associated with better control. CONCLUSION: Mexico is among the countries with the highest diabetes prevalence. A high proportion of adults with diabetes did not have a previous diagnosis, and the proportion with glycemic control is low. Strengthening screening to achieve a timely diagnosis, and improving glycemic control, should be key actions in the management of diabetes.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Glycemic Control , Adult , Aged , Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , Mexico/epidemiology , Prevalence
18.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 12: 741248, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526766

ABSTRACT

Background: Hyperglycemia and obesity are associated with a worse prognosis in subjects with COVID-19 independently. Their interaction as well as the potential modulating effects of additional confounding factors is poorly known. Therefore, we aimed to identify and evaluate confounding factors affecting the prognostic value of obesity and hyperglycemia in relation to mortality and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) due to COVID-19. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted in two Hospitals from Italy (Bologna and Rome) and three from Spain (Barcelona and Girona) as well as subjects from Primary Health Care centers. Mortality from COVID-19 and risk for ICU admission were evaluated using logistic regression analyses and machine learning (ML) algorithms. Results: As expected, among 3,065 consecutive patients, both obesity and hyperglycemia were independent predictors of ICU admission. A ML variable selection strategy confirmed these results and identified hyperglycemia, blood hemoglobin and serum bilirubin associated with increased mortality risk. In subjects with blood hemoglobin levels above the median, hyperglycemic and morbidly obese subjects had increased mortality risk than normoglycemic individuals or non-obese subjects. However, no differences were observed among individuals with hemoglobin levels below the median. This was particularly evident in men: those with severe hyperglycemia and hemoglobin concentrations above the median had 30 times increased mortality risk compared with men without hyperglycemia. Importantly, the protective effect of female sex was lost in subjects with increased hemoglobin levels. Conclusions: Blood hemoglobin substantially modulates the influence of hyperglycemia on increased mortality risk in patients with COVID-19. Monitoring hemoglobin concentrations seem of utmost importance in the clinical settings to help clinicians in the identification of patients at increased death risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Hyperglycemia/epidemiology , Obesity, Morbid/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Incidence , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity, Morbid/blood , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk , Sex Factors , Spain , Survival Rate
19.
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care ; 9(2)2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1518143

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the accessibility to hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) tests required for virtual diabetes clinics. The aim was to develop and validate a user-friendly postal system for remote HbA1c monitoring. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Validation: A total of 123 capillary blood samples from people with diabetes (PWD) needing face-to-face consultations along with healthy volunteers were measured on a point-of-care (POC) Siemens DCA Vantage Analyzer. Another sample of 5-10 drops was simultaneously collected in a K2EDTA tube (BD Microtainer) and stored for up to 12 days at room temperature for subsequent retesting. Feasibility: During October to December 2020, a total of 286 postal HbA1c kits were sent to PWD prior to their virtual consultation. These contained sample collection guidance, the necessary equipment and a feedback form. As per Packing Instruction 650 regulations, these were posted back to the diabetes center for HbA1c testing on the POC analyzer. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation between the first and the stored sample (R2=0.978). There was a small clinically insignificant negative bias -1.53 mmol/mol (2 SD = 3.10 mmol/mol). Bland-Altman plots showed 93% of results within 2 SD. Of the 87% of returned kits, only one sample failed to be analyzed. 94% of PWD who provided feedback were happy to use the postal HbA1c system again. CONCLUSIONS: A robust user-friendly postal HbA1c system has been created and successfully integrated into clinical practice using the existing POC equipment at the diabetes center. It provides accurate HbA1c results and is an invaluable tool for remote monitoring of HbA1c in PWD-both during and after the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Feasibility Studies , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Br J Community Nurs ; 26(11): 544-552, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506202

ABSTRACT

Type 1 diabetes is a lifelong condition which affects all age ranges, for reasons unknown, and the UK has one of the highest incidences of this complex condition in the world. Type 1 diabetes is caused by autoimmune damage to the insulin-producing ß-cells found in the pancreatic islet cells, leading to severe insulin deficiency. People with diabetes need to achieve a target glyosylated haemoglobin level to avoid macro- and microvascular complications, but there is the associated risk of hypoglycaemic events. These can vary in severity and consequences but will likely always cause worry for the person living with diabetes. There are many risk factors and reasons to be explored when looking at hypoglycaemia. This case study explores the nursing interventions that can be safely worked through and prioritised, within the community setting, to allow people with diabetes to be safe from severe hypoglycaemia, thus improving their quality of life and safety, as well as reducing costs for the NHS.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/nursing , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Hypoglycemia/prevention & control , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Humans , Hypoglycemia/etiology , Hypoglycemia/nursing , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Quality of Life
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL