TY - JOUR
T1 - Meeting individualized glycemic targets in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes in Spain
AU - Miñambres, I.
AU - Mediavilla, J. J.
AU - Sarroca, J.
AU - Pérez, A.
PY - 2016/2/17
Y1 - 2016/2/17
N2 - © 2016 Miñambres et al. Background: Information about the achievement of glycemic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes according to different individualization strategies is scarce. Our aim was to analyze the allocation of type 2 diabetic patients into individualized glycemic targets according to different strategies of individualization and to assess the degree of achievement of adequate control. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis on 5382 type 2 diabetic patients in primary care setting in Spain between 2011 and 2012. Targets of HbA1c were assigned based on different strategies of individualization of glycemic targets: 1) the ADA/EASD consensus 2) The Spanish Diabetes Society (SED) consensus 3) a strategy that accounts for the risk of hypoglycemia (HYPO) considering the presence of a hypoglycemia during the last year and type of hypoglycemic treatment. Concordance between the different strategies was analyzed. Results: A total of 15.9, 17.1 and 67 % applied to ADA/EASD recommendation of HbA1c target of <6.5, < 7 and <8 % (48, 53 and 64 mmol/mol), and 31.9 and 67.4 % applied to the SED glycemic target of <6.5 and <7.5 % (<48 and 58 mmol/mol). Using the HYPO strategy, 53.5 % had a recommended HbA1c target <7 % (53 mmol/mol). There is a 94 % concordance between the ADA/EASD and SED strategies, and a concordance of 41-42 % between these strategies and HYPO strategy. Using the three different strategies, the overall proportion of patients achieving glycemic targets was 56-68 %. Conclusions: Individualization of glycemic targets increases the number of patients who are considered adequately controlled. The proposed HYPO strategy identifies a similar proportion of patients that achieve adequate glycemic control than ADA/EASD or SED strategies, but its concordance with these strategies in terms of patient classification is bad.
AB - © 2016 Miñambres et al. Background: Information about the achievement of glycemic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes according to different individualization strategies is scarce. Our aim was to analyze the allocation of type 2 diabetic patients into individualized glycemic targets according to different strategies of individualization and to assess the degree of achievement of adequate control. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis on 5382 type 2 diabetic patients in primary care setting in Spain between 2011 and 2012. Targets of HbA1c were assigned based on different strategies of individualization of glycemic targets: 1) the ADA/EASD consensus 2) The Spanish Diabetes Society (SED) consensus 3) a strategy that accounts for the risk of hypoglycemia (HYPO) considering the presence of a hypoglycemia during the last year and type of hypoglycemic treatment. Concordance between the different strategies was analyzed. Results: A total of 15.9, 17.1 and 67 % applied to ADA/EASD recommendation of HbA1c target of <6.5, < 7 and <8 % (48, 53 and 64 mmol/mol), and 31.9 and 67.4 % applied to the SED glycemic target of <6.5 and <7.5 % (<48 and 58 mmol/mol). Using the HYPO strategy, 53.5 % had a recommended HbA1c target <7 % (53 mmol/mol). There is a 94 % concordance between the ADA/EASD and SED strategies, and a concordance of 41-42 % between these strategies and HYPO strategy. Using the three different strategies, the overall proportion of patients achieving glycemic targets was 56-68 %. Conclusions: Individualization of glycemic targets increases the number of patients who are considered adequately controlled. The proposed HYPO strategy identifies a similar proportion of patients that achieve adequate glycemic control than ADA/EASD or SED strategies, but its concordance with these strategies in terms of patient classification is bad.
KW - Glycemic control
KW - Glycemic targets
KW - Individualization
KW - Type 2 diabetes
UR - https://ddd.uab.cat/record/185800
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12902-016-0090-1
DO - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12902-016-0090-1
M3 - Article
VL - 16
JO - BMC Endocrine Disorders
JF - BMC Endocrine Disorders
SN - 1472-6823
IS - 1
M1 - 10
ER -