Comparison of weight loss outcomes between obese patients with and without Type 2 diabetes attending a weight management focused structured educational group

Aims: Specialist lifestyle management (SLiM) is a medically supported dietetically led structured group education and self-management programme focusing on weight management. Obese patients with Type 2 diabetes are perceived to find it more difficult to lose weight compared with those without diabetes. We aimed to compare the weight loss achieved by obese patients with or without Type 2 diabetes completing the SLiM programme. Methods: A prospective analysis of patients attending SLiM between 2009 and 2013 was conducted. Results: There were 454 obese patients (mean age 49.1 ± 11.6years, women 72.5%, body mass index 49.8 ± 9.3kg/m2, weight137.3 ± 28kg). 152/454 patients (33%) had Type 2 diabetes of which 31 (20.4%) were insulin treated. Patients with Type 2diabetes were older (52.4 ± 11.3 vs 47.5 ± 11.4 years, p < 0.001). SLiM resulted in significant weight loss in patients with (136.5 ± 27 vs 130.2 ± 25.3, p < 0.001) or without (137.6 ± 29 vs 132.6 ± 28.4, p < 0.001) Type 2 diabetes. Weight loss was comparable between patients with and without Type 2 diabetes (6.1 ± 7.9 vs5.1 ± 7kg, p = 0.2). The proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10%weight loss was similar between patients with and without Type 2diabetes (10.5% vs 9.9%, p = 0.4). Insulin-treated patients lost similar weight to those not treated with insulin (6.3 ± 9.4 vs 6.1 ± 7.6kg, p = 0.9). After adjustment for age, sex, referral weight and medications, Type 2 diabetes did not predict weight change during the SLiM programme (b = 0.3, p = 0.5). Conclusions: Attending the SLiM groups produces a significant weight loss in patients with Type 2 diabetes which is comparable to those without Type 2 diabetes. Insulin-treated patients lost similar weight to those not on insulin. Weight gain with Type 2 diabetes and insulin treatment is not ‘unavoidable’ if patients receive the appropriate support and education.

Short-term stability in refractive status despite large fluctuations in glucose levels in diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2

Purpose: This work investigates how short-term changes in blood glucose concentration affect the refractive components of the diabetic eye in patients with long-term Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. Methods: Blood glucose concentration, refractive error components (mean spherical equivalent MSE, J0, J45), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), crystalline lens thickness (LT), axial length (AL) and ocular aberrations were monitored at two-hourly intervals over a 12-hour period in: 20 T1DM patients (mean age ± SD) 38±14 years, baseline HbA1c 8.6±1.9%; 21 T2DM patients (mean age ± SD) 56±11 years, HbA1c 7.5±1.8%; and in 20 control subjects (mean age ± SD) 49±23 years, HbA1c 5.5±0.5%. The refractive and biometric results were compared with the corresponding changes in blood glucose concentration. Results: Blood glucose concentration at different times was found to vary significantly within (p<0.0005) and between groups (p<0.0005). However, the refractive error components and ocular aberrations were not found to alter significantly over the day in either the diabetic patients or the control subjects (p>0.05). Minor changes of marginal statistical or optical significance were observed in some biometric parameters. Similarly there were some marginally significant differences between the baseline biometric parameters of well-controlled and poorly-controlled diabetic subjects. Conclusion: This work suggests that normal, short-term fluctuations (of up to about 6 mM/l on a timescale of a few hours) in the blood glucose levels of diabetics are not usually associated with acute changes in refractive error or ocular wavefront aberrations. It is therefore possible that factors other than refractive error fluctuations are sometimes responsible for the transient visual problems often reported by diabetic patients. © 2012 Huntjens et al.

Sensor and software use for the glycaemic management of insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients

Lowering glucose levels, while avoiding hypoglycaemia, can be challenging in insulin-treated patients with diabetes. We evaluated the role of ambulatory glucose profile in optimising glycaemic control in this population. Insulin-treated patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes were recruited into a prospective, multicentre, 100-day study and randomised to control (n = 28) or intervention (n = 59) groups. The intervention group used ambulatory glucose profile, generated by continuous glucose monitoring, to assess daily glucose levels, whereas the controls relied on capillary glucose testing. Patients were reviewed at days 30 and 45 by the health care professional to adjust insulin therapy. Comparing first and last 2 weeks of the study, ambulatory glucose profile-monitored type 2 diabetes patients (n = 28) showed increased time in euglycaemia (mean ± standard deviation) by 1.4 ± 3.5 h/day (p = 0.0427) associated with reduction in HbA1c from 77 ± 15 to 67 ± 13 mmol/mol (p = 0.0002) without increased hypoglycaemia. Type 1 diabetes patients (n = 25) showed reduction in hypoglycaemia from 1.4 ± 1.7 to 0.8 ± 0.8 h/day (p = 0.0472) associated with a marginal HbA1c decrease from 75 ± 10 to 72 ± 8 mmol/mol (p = 0.0508). Largely similar findings were observed comparing intervention and control groups at end of study. In conclusion, ambulatory glucose profile helps glycaemic management in insulin-treated diabetes patients by increasing time spent in euglycaemia and decreasing HbA1c in type 2 diabetes patients, while reducing hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes patients.

Natural history of retinopathy in children and young people with type 1 diabetes

Purpose: To describe the prevalence and natural history of retinopathy in a cohort of children and young people with type 1 diabetes attending a tertiary hospital diabetes clinic. Methods: We analysed retinopathy screening data from 2008 to 2010 on all eligible children using the 'Twinkle' diabetes database and the regional retinal screening database. Results: A total of 88% (149/169) of eligible children were screened in 2008, median age 14 years, 52% male. The prevalence of retinopathy was 19.5% (30/149). All children had background retinopathy grade R1. There was significant difference in median (range) duration of diabetes, 7.7 years (0.6–13.7) vs 5 years (0.2–12.5) (P<0.001) and median (range) HbA1C, 9.1% (7.2–14) vs 8.6% (5.6–13.1) (P=0.02), between the groups with and without retinopathy. At 2- years follow-up, 12/30 (40%) had unchanged retinopathy grade R1, 10/30 (33.3%) showed resolution of changes (R0), 1/30 progressed to maculopathy, and 7/30 had no follow-up data. Median (range) HbA1C in 2008 and 2010 for the groups with stable vs resolved changes was similar, 9.1% (7.2–14.0) and 9.2% (7–14.0) vs 9.5% (7.8–14.0) and 9.2% (8.7–14.0). Of the 119 without retinopathy in 2008, 27 (22.5%) had developed retinopathy within 2 years, including 1 with pre-proliferative retinopathy and 1 with maculopathy. There was no significant difference in HbA1c between those who progressed to retinopathy (8.7% (7.1–13.1)) (8.7% (7.1–13.1)), and those who did not (8.6% (6.3–12.2)). Conclusions: Prevalence of background retinopathy in our cohort was comparable to the previously published reports, with higher HbA1c and longer duration of diabetes being significant risk factors. On short-term follow-up, Grade 1 retinopathy is likely to resolve in a third of patients and remain unchanged in just over a third.