Article

Physician reasons for nonpharmacologic treatment of hyperglycemia in older patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Global Health Outcomes, WS2E85, 1 Merck Drive, Whitehouse Station, NJ, 08889, USA, .
Diabetes Therapy 11/2012; 3(1):5. DOI: 10.1007/s13300-012-0005-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To identify reasons why primary care physicians (PCPs) do not treat older patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with antihyperglycemic agents following diagnosis.
US PCPs were surveyed via the internet regarding their reasons for not treating patients aged >65 years diagnosed with T2DM and had not yet initiated antihyperglycemic therapy for ≥6 months after diagnosis. PCPs were requested to provide relevant clinical information for untreated older patients and select applicable reasons for not initiating treatment from a list of 35 possibilities, grouped into five categories.
A total of 508 PCPs completed the online survey and provided complete clinical data for 770 patients. The reasons provided by the first-ranked physician for not initiating antihyperglycemic therapy were related to diet and exercise (57.5%); mild hyperglycemia (23.8%); patient's concerns (13.4%); concerns about antihyperglycemic agents (3.0%); and comorbidities and polypharmacy (2.3%). The "diet and exercise" category was the most common first-ranked non-treatment reason, regardless of recent hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) stratum. Reasons within the "patient's concerns," "concerns related to antihyperglycemic agents," and "comorbidities and polypharmacy" categories tended to be selected more often as first-ranked reasons by physicians for patients with higher HbA(1c) values. Of the 158 patients whose physicians planned to initiate antihyperglycemic therapy within the next month, 54.4% already had a most recent HbA(1c) value above their physician-stated threshold for treatment initiation.
In the PCPs studied, there was a tendency to select appropriate reasons for non-treatment with antihyperglycemic agents given their patients' glycemic status. However, there was inertia related to the initiation of pharmacological therapy in some older patients with newly diagnosed T2DM. Important factors included physicians' perceptions of "mild" hyperglycemia and the HbA(1c) threshold for using antihyperglycemic agents.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
87 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: During the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who received intensive glucose therapy had a lower risk of microvascular complications than did those receiving conventional dietary therapy. We conducted post-trial monitoring to determine whether this improved glucose control persisted and whether such therapy had a long-term effect on macrovascular outcomes. Of 5102 patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, 4209 were randomly assigned to receive either conventional therapy (dietary restriction) or intensive therapy (either sulfonylurea or insulin or, in overweight patients, metformin) for glucose control. In post-trial monitoring, 3277 patients were asked to attend annual UKPDS clinics for 5 years, but no attempts were made to maintain their previously assigned therapies. Annual questionnaires were used to follow patients who were unable to attend the clinics, and all patients in years 6 to 10 were assessed through questionnaires. We examined seven prespecified aggregate clinical outcomes from the UKPDS on an intention-to-treat basis, according to previous randomization categories. Between-group differences in glycated hemoglobin levels were lost after the first year. In the sulfonylurea-insulin group, relative reductions in risk persisted at 10 years for any diabetes-related end point (9%, P=0.04) and microvascular disease (24%, P=0.001), and risk reductions for myocardial infarction (15%, P=0.01) and death from any cause (13%, P=0.007) emerged over time, as more events occurred. In the metformin group, significant risk reductions persisted for any diabetes-related end point (21%, P=0.01), myocardial infarction (33%, P=0.005), and death from any cause (27%, P=0.002). Despite an early loss of glycemic differences, a continued reduction in microvascular risk and emergent risk reductions for myocardial infarction and death from any cause were observed during 10 years of post-trial follow-up. A continued benefit after metformin therapy was evident among overweight patients. (UKPDS 80; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN75451837.)
    New England Journal of Medicine 10/2008; 359(15):1577-89. · 51.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The natural history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in the elderly has not been previously described in a national longitudinal sample. This national longitudinal analysis (January 1, 1991, to December 31, 2004) examines mortality and morbidity rates in a representative sample of elderly patients newly diagnosed as having DM. Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed as having DM in 1994 (n=33,772) were compared with a control group (n=25,563) regarding death, lower extremity complications, nephropathy, retinopathy, cardiovascular complications, and cerebrovascular complications. The DM group had excess mortality of 9.2% by year 11 compared with the control group. By 2004, 91.8% of the DM group experienced an adverse complication compared with 72.0% of the control group. The DM group had a higher prevalence and incidence of microvascular and macrovascular complications at all time points compared with controls. Patients with DM were at increased risk for all lower extremity complications, particularly those requiring surgical intervention (gangrene, debridement, and amputation). Cardiovascular complications were a leading cause of morbidity, with 57.6% of the DM group diagnosed as having heart failure compared with 34.1% of the controls. Elderly persons newly diagnosed as having DM experienced high rates of complications during 10-year follow-up, far in excess of elderly persons without this diagnosis, implying a substantial burden on the individual and on the health care system.
    Archives of Internal Medicine 06/2007; 167(9):921-7. · 11.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Insulin is the most effective drug available to achieve glycaemic goals in patients with type 2 diabetes. Yet, there is reluctance among physicians, specifically primary care physicians (PCPs) in the USA, to initiate insulin therapy in these patients. To describe PCPs' attitudes about the initiation of insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes and identify areas in which there is a clear lack of consensus. Primary care physicians practicing in the USA, seeing 10 or more patients with type 2 diabetes per week, and having > 3 years of clinical practice were surveyed via an internet site. The survey was developed through literature review, qualitative study and expert panel. Primary care physicians (n = 505, mean age = 46 years, 81% male, 62% with > 10 years practice; 52% internal medicine) showed greatest consensus on attitudes regarding risk/benefits of insulin therapy, positive experiences of patients on insulin and patient fears or concerns about initiating insulin. Clear lack of consensus was seen in attitudes about the metabolic effects of insulin, need for insulin therapy, adequacy of self-monitoring blood glucose, time needed for training and potential for hypoglycaemia in elderly patients. The beliefs of some PCPs are inconsistent with their diabetes treatment goals (HbA1c < or = 7%). Continuing medical education programmes that focus on increasing primary care physician knowledge about the progression of diabetes, the physiological effects of insulin, and tools for successfully initiating insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes are needed.
    International Journal of Clinical Practice 06/2008; 62(6):860-8. · 2.43 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
14 Downloads
Available from
May 22, 2014