Effectiveness of a multicomponent healthcare intervention on blood pressure and lipids among subjects with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes: Findings from the INTEGRA study.

AIM: We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multicomponent healthcare intervention, primarily designed to improve glycemic control, on blood pressure and lipids in individuals with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the Catalonian primary care setting METHODS: A cluster, non-randomized, controlled pragmatic trial was conducted across 11 primary care centers. The intervention group (N=225) received a comprehensive, patient-centered approach, including a dedicated monographic consultation to address therapeutic inertia. The control group (N=181) mirrored the intervention group but lacked the monographic consultation. Secondary endpoints included lipid and blood pressure control assessed at baseline and after a 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: 245 participants completed the study over 12 months. We found no differences in the reduction of lipid laboratory parameters between the groups at the final visit. However, no significant differences were found between the groups for other lipids or the proportion of participants achieving lipid target values. Likewise, no differences were noted between the groups for blood pressure, its target control, and treatment at the final visit. Various clinical factors such as age, sex, diabetes duration, HbA1c levels, BMI, and macrovascular complications among the participants were associated with achieving lipid and blood pressure targets at the final visit. CONCLUSION: The pragmatic multicomponent intervention proposed in the INTEGRA study, showed that including a component designed to reduce clinical inertia in the management of glycemia did not demonstrate benefits in improving lipids and blood pressure in patients with poorly controlled T2DM.

A multicomponent health care intervention is associated with improved glycaemic control in subjects with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes compared with routine care: The INTEGRA study.

AIM: The INTEGRA study evaluated whether a specially designed multicomponent health care intervention improved glycaemic control in subjects with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes compared with standard of care practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pragmatic study in subjects from primary care centres with type 2 diabetes and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) >9% (75 mmol/mol). The multifaceted intervention (N = 225 subjects) included a diabetes-focused visit encouraging therapeutic intensification by health care professionals. Retrospective data from matched controls (N = 675) were obtained from electronic medical records of a primary care database. The primary outcome was to compare the change in HbA1c values between the groups at 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The mean HbA1c decreased substantially in both groups after 3 months, and the mean reduction was significantly greater in the intervention group than in the usual care group after 12 months [mean difference -0.66% (-7 mmol/mol), 95% CI -0.4, -1.0; p < .001]. A larger percentage of participants in the intervention group achieved HbA1c <7% and <8% goals (15.5% vs. 5.3% and 29.3% vs. 13.5%, respectively; p < .001). The improvement in HbA1c levels was sustained throughout the study only in the intervention arm. Glucose-lowering therapy was more frequently intensified in patients in the intervention group at the initial and final time points of the study (between 0-3 and 6-12 months; p < .001), with a significant increase in the number of patients prescribed ≥2 antidiabetic therapies (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted intervention oriented at reducing therapeutic inertia by primary care physicians was associated with greater improvement in glycaemic control compared with patients treated as per usual care.

Are There Different Viewpoints About the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Comorbidities? A Multidisciplinary Spanish Qualitative Research.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to explore the vision of a large multidisciplinary group of physicians treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Spain, with a special focus on controversial management aspects. The perceptions of primary care (PC) physicians and hospital care (HC) specialists were compared. METHODS: This was a mixed survey that included Delphi-like statements and opinion, attitude and behaviour (OAB) questions. The Delphi-like statements were assessed on the basis of the degree of agreement among respondents, and a descriptive analysis was performed on the answers to the OAB questions. RESULTS: A total of 296 participants responded to the first wave of the survey, of whom 293 responded to the second wave (211 from PC and 80 from HC, with two respondents for whom there were no data on specialty). A high degree of consensus (CNS ≥ 0.8) was obtained in all the statements. A proactive approach to detect prediabetes or T2DM in asymptomatic people was highly supported (80.4% of agreement). Introducing early treatment intensification was considered to favour the durability of glycaemic control and to delay the progression of the disease (80.4%). There was agreement on the statement that glycaemic variability constitutes a risk factor for chronic complications, although differences in the perceptions of HC physicians and PC specialists were identified (86.3 vs. 80.1%, respectively). More HC physicans than PC specialists considered comorbidities to affect the ability to self-care (95 vs. 82.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The survey revealed that there was a high, albeit not universal, degree of agreement amongst PC physicians and HC specialists in relation to prevention, screening and diagnosis of T2DM; early treatment intensification; dysglycaemias; and the management of patients with comorbidities. The statement on the management of patients with comorbidities elicited the highest difference between PC physicans and HC specialists. The results of this survey indicate that there is room for improvement in terms of implementing strategies in these areas.

Analysis of the effectiveness of second oral glucose-lowering therapy in routine clinical practice from the mediterranean area: A retrospective cohort study.

AIM: To compare the changes in HbA1c, the effect on body weight or both combined after the addition of a DPP-4i, SGLT-2i, or sulfonylureas (SU) to metformin in real-world condition. METHODS: We used a primary care SIDIAP database. The included subjects were matched by propensity score according to baseline age, sex, HbA1c, weight, inclusion date, diabetes duration, and kidney function. RESULTS: Mean absolute HbA1c reduction was: 1.28% for DPP4i, 1.29% for SGLT2i and 1.26% for SU. Mean weight reduction was: 1.21 kg for DPP4i, 3.47 kg for SGLT2i and 0.04 kg for SU. The proportion of patients who achieved combined target HbA1c (≥0.5%) and weight (≥3%) reductions after the addition of DPP-4i, SGLT-2i or SU, was: 24.2%, 41.3%, and 15.2%, respectively. Small differences in systolic blood pressure reduction (1.07, 3.10 and 0.96 mmHg, respectively) were observed in favour of SGLT-2i. Concerning the lipids, we observed small differences, with an HDL-cholesterol increase with SGLT-2i. CONCLUSION: Our real-world study showed that the addition of SGLT-2i to metformin was associated with greater reductions in weight and the combination target of weight-HbA1c compared to SU and DPP4 inhibitors. However, similar hypoglycaemic effectiveness was observed among the three-drug classes.

Prevalence of diabetic retinopathy and its relationship with glomerular filtration rate and other risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain. DM2 HOPE study.

AIM: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of blindness in working age population in developed countries. Albuminuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) have been considered biomarkers for DR. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of DR and its relationship with eGFR and other risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients (T2DM) in Spain. METHODS: A cross-sectional and descriptive study has been performed in 14,266 patients. Clinical records were reviewed. Demographic data, clinical diagnoses, clinical variables, and results from laboratory tests were recorded. Prevalence rates of DR were calculated. Logistic regression analysis was applied to assess predictors of the DR presence/absence. RESULTS: DR prevalence was 14.9%, being more prevalent in women (p = 0.0087) and in older patients (p < 0.0001). Duration of disease (OR = 5.3, IC95% = 3.8-7.4; p < 0.0001), eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (OR = 2.0, IC95% 1.6-2.4; p < 0.0001), levels of HbA1c ≥ 7% (OR = 1.9, IC95% = 1.5-2.3; p < 0.0001) and high blood pressure (OR = 1.6, IC95% = 1.2-2.1; p = 0.0032) were associated with higher risk of DR. DR was also more frequent in patients taking insulin (32,6% vs. 10,2%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Around one in seven patients with T2DM has DR after nine years since diagnosis. Time since diagnosis, insulin therapy, cardiovascular profile, and renal dysfunction are associated with DR in patients with T2DM in Spain.

Screening for people with abnormal glucose metabolism in the European DE-PLAN project.

AIMS: The aim of this report is to describe the application of the FINDRISC in clinical practice within the DE-PLAN project as a step to screen for Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Nine out of 24 possible centers were included. Six centers used opportunistic screening methods for participant recruitment whereas three centers provided study participants of a random population sample. Men (n=1621) and women (n=2483) were evaluated separately. In order to assess the prevalence of abnormal glucose tolerance (AGT) disorders across different risk categories, the FINDRISC was used. Anthropometric measurements included blood pressure, height, weight, and waist circumference. Blood lipids and an oral glucose tolerance test were performed in all participants. The primary outcome was identified risk of AGT and type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: There was no difference in the prevalence of smoking between the FINDRISC categories, people with a FINDRISC below 15 points tend to be more physically active and to eat more frequently fruits and vegetables. Men with a FINDRISC from 15 to 19 points had a prevalence of abnormal glucose tolerance of approximately 60% and women 50%. The prevalence for men and women with a FINDRISC >20 points was 80%. 30% of men and 20% of women with a FINDRISC between 15 and 19 points had Type 2 diabetes. Among people with a FINDRISC more than 20 points, 50% had previously undiagnosed Type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The FINDRISC may be a practical tool to be used in primary health-care systems throughout the European population.

Home blood pressure self-monitoring: diagnostic performance in white-coat hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic performance of home blood pressure self-monitoring in white-coat hypertension using a 3-day reading program. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and ninety nontreated patients recently diagnosed with mild-moderate hypertension, selected consecutively at four primary healthcare centers in the city of Barcelona, were included. Each patient underwent morning and night home blood pressure self-monitoring with readings in triplicate for three consecutive days, followed by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The normality cut-off point value for home blood pressure self-monitoring and daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was 135/85 mmHg. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were diagnosed with white-coat hypertension with home blood pressure self-monitoring (34.8%; 95% confidence interval: 27.9-42.2) and 74 with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (41.6%; 95% confidence interval: 33.7-48.4). No statistically significant differences were observed between home blood pressure self-monitoring values and those of diurnal ambulatory blood pressure monitoring [137.4 (14.3)/82.1 (8.3) mmHg vs. 134.8 (11.3)/81.3 (9.5) mmHg]. Home blood pressure self-monitoring diagnostic performance parameters were sensitivity 50.0% (95% confidence interval: 38.3-61.7), specificity 75.7% (95% confidence interval: 66.3-83.2), positive and negative predictive values 58.7% (95% confidence interval: 45.6-70.8) and 68.6% (95% confidence interval: 59.4-76.7), respectively, and positive and negative probability coefficients 2.05 and 0.66, respectively. Analysis of different normality cut-off points using a receiver operating characteristic curve failed to produce significant improvement in the diagnostic performance of home blood pressure self-monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of a 3-day home blood pressure self-monitoring reading program in white-coat hypertension was poor. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring continues to be the test of choice for this indication.