Project description:Self-management interventions (SMIs) offer a promising approach to actively engage patients in the management of their chronic diseases. Within the scope of the COMPAR-EU project, our goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the utilisation and implementation of SMIs in the care of adult individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A multidisciplinary panel of experts, utilising a core outcome set (COS), identified critical outcomes and established effect thresholds for each outcome. The panel formulated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, a transparent and rigorous framework for developing and presenting the best available evidence for the formulation of recommendations. All recommendations are based on systematic reviews (SR) of the effects and of values and preferences, a contextual analysis, and a cost-effectiveness analysis. The COMPAR-EU panel is in favour of using SMIs rather than usual care (UC) alone (conditional, very low certainty of the evidence). Furthermore, the panel specifically is in favour of using ten selected SMIs, rather than UC alone (conditional, low certainty of the evidence), mostly encompassing education, self-monitoring, and behavioural techniques. The panel acknowledges that, for most SMIs, moderate resource requirements exist, and cost-effectiveness analyses do not distinctly favour either the SMI or UC. Additionally, it recognises that SMIs are likely to enhance equity, deeming them acceptable and feasible for implementation.
Project description:The recent American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes guideline mentioned glycaemia management in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs); however, it did not cover the treatment approaches for patients with T2DM having a high risk of CVD, and treatment and screening approaches for CVDs in patients with concomitant T2DM. This consensus guideline undertakes the data obtained from all the cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) to propose approaches for the T2DM management in presence of CV comorbidities. For patients at high risk of CVD, metformin is the drug of choice to manage the T2DM to achieve a patient specific HbA1c target. In case of established CVD, a combination of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist with proven CV benefits is recommended along with metformin, while for chronic kidney disease or heart failure, a sodium-glucose transporter proteins-2 inhibitor with proven benefit is advised. This document also summarises various screening and investigational approaches for the major CV events with their accuracy and specificity along with the treatment guidance to assist the healthcare professionals in selecting the best management strategies for every individual. Since lifestyle modification and management plays an important role in maintaining the effectiveness of the pharmacological therapies, authors of this consensus recommendation have also briefed on the patient-centric non-pharmacological management of T2DM and CVD.
Project description:In Colombia, diabetes mellitus is a public health program for those responsible for creating and implementing strategies for prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up that are applicable at all care levels, with the objective of establishing early and sustained control of diabetes. A clinical practice guide has been developed following the broad outline of the methodological guide from the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, with the aim of systematically gathering scientific evidence and formulating recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. The current document presents in summary form the results of this process, including the recommendations and the considerations taken into account in formulating them. In general terms, what is proposed here is a screening process using the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score questionnaire adapted to the Colombian population, which enables early diagnosis of the illness, and an algorithm for determining initial treatment that can be generalized to most patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 and that is simple to apply in a primary care context. In addition, several recommendations have been made to scale up pharmacological treatment in those patients that do not achieve the objectives or fail to maintain them during initial treatment. These recommendations also take into account the evolution of weight and the individualization of glycemic control goals for special populations. Finally, recommendations have been made for opportune detection of micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes.
Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies have reported that clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in a variety of clinical areas are of modest or variable quality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of an international cohort of CPGs that provide recommendations on pharmaceutical management of glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2).Methods and findingsWe searched the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) on February 15th and June 4th, 2012 for CPGs meeting inclusion criteria. Two independent assessors rated the quality of each CPG using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Twenty-four guidelines were evaluated, and most had high scores for clarity and presentation. However, scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, and applicability domains varied considerably. The majority of guidelines scored low on editorial independence, and only seven CPGs were based on an underlying systematic review of the evidence.ConclusionsThe overall quality of CPGs for glycemic control in DM2 is moderate, but there is substantial variability among quality domains within and across guidelines. Guideline users need to be aware of this variability and carefully appraise and select the guidelines that they apply to patient care.
Project description:Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a fixed-ratio co-formulation of insulin degludec (IDeg), which provides long-lasting basal insulin coverage, and insulin aspart (IAsp), which targets post-prandial glucose. This expert panel aimed to provide a practical and implementable guidance document to assist clinicians in prescribing IDegAsp in the diabetes management with respect to different patient populations including children and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) as well as pregnant, elderly and hospitalized patients and varying practice patterns (insulin-naive, insulin-treated, switching from basal, basal bolus and premix regimens). The experts recommended that IDegAsp can be used in insulin-naive T2D patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c >8.5%) despite optimal oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) as well as in insulin-treated T2D patients by switching from basal insulin, basal-bolus therapy or premixed insulins in relation to lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and lower intraday glycemic variability, respectively. The experts considered the use of IDegAsp in children with T2D as a basal bolus alternative rather than as an alternative to basal insulin after metformin failure, use of IDegAsp in adult T1D patients as a simplified basal bolus regimen with lesser nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and better fasting plasma glucose control and in children with T1D as an alternative insulin regimen with fewer injection to increase treatment adherence. The proposed expert opinion provides practical information on use of IDegAsp in different patient populations and practice patterns to assist clinicians, which seems to compensate the need for easily implementable guidance on this novel insulin regimen.
Project description:The effect of practicing yoga for the management of type II Diabetes was assessed in this systematic review through searching related electronic databases and the grey literature to the end of May 2007 using Ovid. All randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing yoga practice with other type of intervention or with regular practice or both, were included regardless of language or type of publication. Each study was assessed for quality by two independent reviewers. Mean difference was used for summarizing the effect of each study outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. Pooling of the studies did not take place due to the wide clinical variation between the studies. Publication bias was assessed by statistical methods. Five trials with 363 participants met the inclusion criteria with medium to high risk of bias and different intervention characteristics. The studies' results show improvement in outcomes among patients with diabetes type II. These improvements were mainly among short term or immediate diabetes outcomes and not all were statistically significant. The results were inconclusive and not significant for the long-term outcomes. No adverse effects were reported in any of the included studies. Short-term benefits for patients with diabetes may be achieved from practicing yoga. Further research is needed in this area. Factors like quality of the trials and other methodological issues should be improved by large randomized control trials with allocation concealment to assess the effectiveness of yoga on diabetes type II. A definitive recommendation for physicians to encourage their patients to practice yoga cannot be reached at present.
Project description:Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is the most common form of diabetes, and is rising in incidence with widespread prevalence. Multiple gene variants are associated with glucose homeostasis, complex T2DM pathogenesis, and its complications. Exploring more effective therapeutic strategies for patients with diabetes is crucial. Pharmacogenomics has made precision medicine possible by allowing for individualized drug therapy based on a patient's genetic and genomic information. T2DM is treated with various classes of oral hypoglycemic agents, such as biguanides, sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, meglitinides, DPP4 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors, α-glucosidase inhibitors, and GLP1 analogues, which exhibit various pharmacogenetic variants. Although genomic interventions in monogenic diabetes have been implemented in clinical practice, they are still in the early stages for complex polygenic disorders, such as T2DM. Precision DM medicine has the potential to be effective in personalized therapy for those suffering from various forms of DM, such as T2DM. With recent developments in genetic techniques, the application of candidate-gene studies, large-scale genotyping investigations, genome-wide association studies, and "multiomics" studies has begun to produce results that may lead to changes in clinical practice. Enhanced knowledge of the genetic architecture of T2DM presents a bigger translational potential. This review summarizes the genetics and pathophysiology of T2DM, candidate-gene approaches, genome-wide association studies, personalized medicine, clinical relevance of pharmacogenetic variants associated with oral hypoglycemic agents, and paths toward personalized diabetology.
Project description:Cardiovascular disease remains the principal cause of death and disability among patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes mellitus exacerbates mechanisms underlying atherosclerosis and heart failure. Unfortunately, these mechanisms are not adequately modulated by therapeutic strategies focusing solely on optimal glycemic control with currently available drugs or approaches. In the setting of multifactorial risk reduction with statins and other lipid-lowering agents, antihypertensive therapies, and antihyperglycemic treatment strategies, cardiovascular complication rates are falling, yet remain higher for patients with diabetes mellitus than for those without. This review considers the mechanisms, history, controversies, new pharmacological agents, and recent evidence for current guidelines for cardiovascular management in the patient with diabetes mellitus to support evidence-based care in the patient with diabetes mellitus and heart disease outside of the acute care setting.
Project description:AimsPediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a relatively new disease with increasing incidence corresponding to the obesity epidemic among youth. It is important for clinicians to have access to high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for appropriate management of pediatric patients with T2DM. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate overall quality of CPGs for the management of pediatric T2DM using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Trip, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and grey literature to identify eligible CPGs. We also searched the webpages of national and international diabetes and pediatric organizations globally. We included CPGs from national and international diabetes and pediatric associations that were published as standalone guidelines for T2DM in children and adolescents (2-18 years of age). We also included pediatric and adult guidelines for type 1 diabetes if they included a section addressing T2DM management in children and adolescents. We retrieved the two most recent guidelines from each organization when available to assess change in quality over time. We excluded individual studies and systematic reviews that made treatment recommendations as well as CPGs that were developed for a single institution.ResultsWe included 21 unique CPGs in this systematic review. Of the included guidelines, 12 were developed or updated between 2012 and 2014. Five of all included CPGs were specific to pediatric populations. The analysis revealed that "Rigour of Development" (mean 45%, SD 28.68) and "Editorial Independence" (mean 45%, SD 35.19) were the lowest scoring domains on the AGREE II for the majority of guidelines, whereas "Clarity of Presentation" was the highest scoring domain (mean 72%, SD 18.89).ConclusionsOverall, two thirds of the pediatric T2DM guidelines were moderate to low quality and the remaining third ranked higher in quality. Low quality was especially due to the scores for the "Rigour of Development" domain, which directly measures guideline development methodology. It is important that future guidelines and updates of existing guidelines improve the methodology of development and quality of reporting in order to appropriately guide physicians managing children and adolescents with T2DM.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016034187.