3 resultados para diabetic care
em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
Resumo:
QUESTION UNDER STUDY: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) among type 2 diabetic patients in primary care settings in Switzerland, and to analyse the prescription of antidiabetic drugs in CKD according to the prevailing recommendations. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, each participating physician was asked to introduce anonymously in a web database the data from up to 15 consecutive diabetic patients attending her/his office between December 2013 and June 2014. Demographic, clinical and biochemical data were analysed. CKD was classified with the KDIGO nomenclature based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio. RESULTS: A total of 1 359 patients (mean age 66.5 ± 12.4 years) were included by 109 primary care physicians. CKD stages 3a, 3b and 4 were present in 13.9%, 6.1%, and 2.4% of patients, respectively. Only 30.6% of patients had an entry for urinary albumin/creatinine ratio. Among them, 35.6% were in CKD stage A2, and 4.1% in stage A3. Despite prevailing limitations, metformin and sulfonylureas were prescribed in 53.9% and 16.5%, respectively, of patients with advanced CKD (eGFR <30 ml/min). More than a third of patients were on a dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor across all CKD stages. Insulin use increased progressively from 26.8% in CKD stage 1-2 to 50% in stage 4. CONCLUSIONS: CKD is frequent in patients with type 2 diabetes attending Swiss primary care practices, with CKD stage 3 and 4 affecting 22.4% of cases. This emphasizes the importance of routine screening of diabetic nephropathy based on both eGFR and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio, the latter being largely underused by primary care physicians. A careful individual drug risk/benefit balance assessment is mandatory to avoid the frequently observed inappropriate prescription of antidiabetic drugs in CKD patients.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: While Switzerland invests a lot of money in its healthcare system, little is known about the quality of care delivered. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of care provided to patients with diabetes in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 406 non-institutionalized adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes. Patients' characteristics, diabetes and process of care indicators were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. Process indicators (past 12 months) included HbA1C check among HbA1C-aware patients, eye assessment by ophtalmologist, microalbuminuria check, feet examination, lipid test, blood pressure and weight measurement, influenza immunization, physical activity recommendations, and dietary recommendations. Item-by-item (each process of care indicator: percentage of patients having received it), composite (mean percentage of recommended care: sum of received processes of care / sum of possible recommended care), and all-or-none (percentage of patients receiving all specified recommended care) measures were computed. RESULTS: Mean age was 64.4 years; 59% were men. Type 1 and type 2 diabetes were reported by 18.2% and 68.5% of patients, respectively, but diabetes type remained undetermined for almost 20% of patients. Patients were treated with oral anti-diabetic drugs (50%), insulin (23%) or both (27%). Of 219 HbA1C-aware patients, 98% reported ≥ one HbA1C check during the last year. Also, ≥94% reported ≥ one blood pressure measurement, ≥ one weight measurement or lipid test, and 68%, 64% and 56% had feet examination, microalbuminuria check and eye assessment, respectively. Influenza immunization was reported by 62% of the patients.The percentage of patients receiving all processes of care ranged between 14.2%-16.9%, and 46.6%-50.7%, when considering ten and four indicators, respectively. Ambulatory care utilization showed little use of multidisciplinary care, and low levels of participation in diabetes-education classes. CONCLUSIONS: While routine processes-of-care were performed annually in most patients, diabetes-specific risk screenings, influenza immunization, physical activity and dietary recommendations were less often reported; this was also the case for multidisciplinary care and participation in education classes. There is room for diabetes care improvement in Switzerland. These results should help define priorities and further develop country-specific chronic disease management initiatives for diabetes.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Diabetic patients are at high risk for coronary artery disease (CAD), which is the leading cause of death in this population. The Swiss Society of Endocrinology-Diabetology (SSED) recommends CAD screening for diabetic patients with > or = 2 additional cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF), by stress echocardiography (SE) or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). The aim of this study was to assess the application of these guidelines and the treatment of CVRF in the diabetes outpatient clinics of the five Swiss University Hospitals. METHODS: The study was initiated in Lausanne and the study questionnaires were circulated to the endocrinologists of the five Swiss University Hospitals. Practitioners were asked to include consecutive patients attending the diabetes outpatient clinics over one month. Prevalence of CAD, screening methods for CAD, prevalence of CVRF, biological analyses over the last 6 months and medical therapy were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 302 subjects were included. The mean age was 53 +/- 14 years, 68% had type 2 diabetes, 27% type 1 and 5% other types. Among T2DM with > or = 2 CVRF, 45% were screened for CAD according to SSED guidelines. In T2DM 25% had blood pressure < or = 130/80 mm Hg, 15% a lipid profile within target, 23% HbA1c < or = 7.0%. Overall, 2% achieved all 3 targets. CONCLUSIONS: Only 45% of T2DM with > or = 2 CVRF were screened for CAD according to SSED guidelines and 2% of T2DM had proper control over all CVRF. Efforts are still necessary to improve CAD prevention and screening of diabetic patients in Swiss University Hospitals.