Self monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes:Longitudinal qualitative study of patients' perspectives

Objective: To explore views of patients with type 2 diabetes about self monitoring of blood glucose over time. Design: Longitudinal, qualitative study. Setting: Primary and secondary care settings across Lothian, Scotland. Participants: 18 patients with type 2 diabetes. Main outcome measures: Results from repeat in-depth interviews with patients over four years after clinical diagnosis. Results: Analysis revealed three main themes - the role of health professionals, interpreting readings and managing high values, and the ongoing role of blood glucose self monitoring. Self monitoring decreased over time, and health professionals' behaviour seemed crucial in this: participants interpreted doctors' focus on levels of haemoglobin A1c, and lack of perceived interest in meter readings, as indicating that self monitoring was not worth continuing. Some participants saw readings as a proxy measure of good and bad behaviour - with women especially, chastising themselves when readings were high. Some participants continued to find readings difficult to interpret, with uncertainty about how to respond to high readings. Reassurance and habit were key reasons for continuing. There was little indication that participants were using self monitoring to effect and maintain behaviour change. Conclusions: Clinical uncertainty about the efficacy and role of blood glucose self monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes is mirrored in patients' own accounts. Patients tended not to act on their self monitoring results, in part because of a lack of education about the appropriate response to readings. Health professionals should be explicit about whether and when such patients should self monitor and how they should interpret and act upon the results, especially high readings.

Higher prevalence of retinopathy in diabetic patients of South Asian ethnicity compared with white Europeans in the community:a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE—The purpose of this study was to compare prevalence and risk factors for diabetic retinopathy among U.K. residents of South Asian or white European ethnicity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This was a community-based cross-sectional study involving 10 general practices; 1,035 patients with type 2 diabetes were studied: 421 of South Asian and 614 of white European ethnicity. Diabetic retinopathy, sight-threatening retinopathy, maculopathy, and previous laser photocoagulation therapy were assessed after grading of retinal photographs. Data were collected on risk factors including age, duration, and treatment of diabetes, blood pressures, serum total cholesterol, and A1C. RESULTS—Patients of South Asian ethnicity had significantly higher systolic (144 vs. 137 mmHg, P < 0.0001) and diastolic (84 vs. 74 mmHg, P < 0.0001) blood pressure, A1C (7.9 vs. 7.5%, P < 0.0001), and total cholesterol (4.5 vs. 4.2 mmol/l, P < 0.0001). Diabetic retinopathy was detected in 414 (40%) patients (189 South Asian [45%] versus 225 white European [37%]; P = 0.0078). Sight-threatening retinopathy was detected in 142 (14%) patients (68 South Asian [16%] versus 74 white European [12%]; P = 0.0597). After adjustment for confounders, there were significantly elevated risks of any retinopathy and maculopathy for South Asian versus white European patients. CONCLUSIONS—Patients of South Asian ethnicity had a significantly higher prevalence of diabetic retinopathy and maculopathy, with significantly elevated systolic and diastolic blood pressure, A1C, and total cholesterol; lower attained age; and younger age at diagnosis. Earlier onset of disease and higher levels of modifiable risk factors make early detection of diabetes, annual referral for retinal screening, and intensive risk factor control key elements in addressing this health inequality.

Enhanced diabetes care to patients of south Asian ethnic origin (the United Kingdom Asian Diabetes Study):a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background - Delivery of high-quality, evidence-based health care to deprived sectors of the community is a major goal for society. We investigated the effectiveness of a culturally sensitive, enhanced care package in UK general practices for improvement of cardiovascular risk factors in patients of south Asian origin with type 2 diabetes. Methods - In this cluster randomised controlled trial, 21 inner-city practices in the UK were assigned by simple randomisation to intervention (enhanced care including additional time with practice nurse and support from a link worker and diabetes-specialist nurse [nine practices; n=868]) or control (standard care [12 practices; n=618]) groups. All adult patients of south Asian origin with type 2 diabetes were eligible. Prescribing algorithms with clearly defined targets were provided for all practices. Primary outcomes were changes in blood pressure, total cholesterol, and glycaemic control (haemoglobin A1c) after 2 years. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN 38297969. Findings - We recorded significant differences between treatment groups in diastolic blood pressure (1·91 [95% CI -2·88 to -0·94] mm?Hg, p=0·0001) and mean arterial pressure (1·36 [-2·49 to -0·23] mm?Hg, p=0·0180), after adjustment for confounders and clustering. We noted no significant differences between groups for total cholesterol (0·03 [-0·04 to 0·11] mmol/L), systolic blood pressure (-0·33 [-2·41 to 1·75] mm?Hg), or HbA1c (-0·15% [-0·33 to 0·03]). Economic analysis suggests that the nurse-led intervention was not cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio £28?933 per QALY gained). Across the whole study population over the 2 years of the trial, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and cholesterol decreased significantly by 4·9 (95% CI 4·0–5·9) mm?Hg, 3·8 (3·2–4·4) mm?Hg, and 0·45 (0·40–0·51) mmol/L, respectively, and we recorded a small and non-significant increase for haemoglobin A1c (0·04% [-0·04 to 0·13]), p=0·290). Interpretation - We recorded additional, although small, benefits from our culturally tailored care package that were greater than the secular changes achieved in the UK in recent years. Stricter targets in general practice and further measures to motivate patients are needed to achieve best possible health-care outcomes in south Asian patients with diabetes. Funding - Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier Laboratories UK, Merck Sharp & Dohme/Schering-Plough, Takeda UK, Roche, Merck Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo UK, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Solvay Health Care, and Assurance Medical Society UK.

Dapagliflozin monotherapy in drug-naïve patients with diabetes:a randomized-controlled trial of low-dose range

Aims: Many patients with type 2 diabetes are suboptimally managed with currently available therapies. Dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor, has shown efficacy in reducing diabetic hyperglycaemia. This study assessed efficacy of three lower doses in recently diagnosed patients. Methods: This phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assigned treatment-naïve patients to placebo or dapagliflozin monotherapy (1, 2.5 or 5 mg) daily for 24 weeks. Patients were antidiabetic drug-naïve with inadequate glycaemic control [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) =7.0 and =10.0%]. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline. Secondary endpoints included changes in body weight and fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and proportions achieving HbA1c

The efficacy and safety of imeglimin as add-on therapy in patientswith type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE - A 12-week study assessed the efficacy and safety of a new oral antidiabetic agent, imeglimin, as add-on therapy in type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled with metformin alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - A total of 156 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive imeglimin (1,500mg twice a day) or placebo added to a stable dose of metformin (1,500-2,000 mg/day). Change in A1C from baseline was the primary efficacy outcome; secondary outcomes included fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and proinsulin/insulin ratio. RESULTS - After 12 weeks, the placebo-subtracted decrease in A1C with metformin-imeglimin was 20.44% (P <0.001). Metformin-imeglimin also significantly improved FPG and the proinsulin/insulin ratio from baseline (20.91 mg/dL and 27.5, respectively) compared with metformin-placebo (0.36 mg/dL and 11.81). Metformin-imeglimin therapy was generally welltolerated with a comparable safety profile to metformin-placebo. CONCLUSIONS - Addition of imeglimin to metformin improved glycemic control and offers potential as a new treatment for type 2 diabetes. Copyright © 2013 by the American Diabetes Association.

The efficacy and safety of imeglimin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with sitagliptin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE: This 12-week study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of imeglimin as add-on therapy to the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with sitagliptin monotherapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, imeglimin (1,500 mg b.i.d.) or placebo was added to sitagliptin (100 mg q.d.) over 12weeks in 170 patientswith type 2 diabetes (mean age 56.8 years; BMI 32.2 kg/m2) that was inadequately controlled with sitagliptin alone (A1C ≥7.5%) during a 12-week run-in period. The primary ef ficacy end point was the change in A1C from baseline versus placebo; secondary end points included corresponding changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, strati fication by baseline A1C, and percentage of A1C responders. RESULTS: Imeglimin reduced A1C levels (least-squares mean difference) from baseline (8.5%) by 0.60% compared with an increase of 0.12% with placebo (between-group difference 0.72%, P < 0.001). The corresponding changes in FPG were -0.93 mmol/L with imeglimin vs. -0.11 mmol/L with placebo (P = 0.014). With imeglimin, the A1C level decreased by ≥0.5% in 54.3% of subjects vs. 21.6% with placebo (P < 0.001), and 19.8%of subjects receiving imeglimin achieved a decrease in A1C level of ≤7% compared with subjects receiving placebo (1.1%) (P = 0.004). Imeglimin was generally well tolerated, with a safety pro file comparable to placebo and no related treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Imeglimin demonstrated incremental efficacy benefits as add-on therapy to sitagliptin, with comparable tolerability to placebo, highlighting the potential for imeglimin to complement other oral antihyperglycemic therapies. © 2014 by the American Diabetes Association.