Strategies for overcoming therapeutic inertia in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To systematically investigate the effect of interventions to overcome therapeutic inertia on glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We electronically searched for randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies published between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2019 evaluating the effect of interventions on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control. Characteristics of included studies and HbA1c difference between intervention and control arms (main outcome) were extracted. Interventions were grouped as: care management and patient education; nurse or certified diabetes educator (CDE); pharmacist; or physician-based. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies including 22 243 individuals were combined in nonlinear random-effects meta-regressions; the median (range) duration of intervention was 1 year (0.9 to 36 months). Compared to the control arm, HbA1c reduction ranged from: -17.7 mmol/mol (-1.62%) to -4.4 mmol/mol (-0.40%) for nurse- or CDE-based interventions; -13.1 mmol/mol (-1.20%) to 3.3 mmol/mol (0.30%) for care management and patient education interventions; -9.8 mmol/mol (-0.90%) to -6.6 mmol/mol (-0.60%) for pharmacist-based interventions; and -4.4 mmol/mol (-0.40%) to 2.8 mmol/mol (0.26%) for physician-based interventions. Across the included studies, a reduction in HbA1c was observed only during the first year (6 months: -4.2 mmol/mol, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.2, -2.2 [-0.38%, 95% CI -0.56, -0.20]; 1 year: -1.6 mmol/mol, 95% CI -3.3, 0.1 [-0.15%, 95% CI -0.30, 0.01]) and in individuals with preintervention HbA1c >75 mmol/mol (9%). CONCLUSIONS: The most effective approaches to mitigating therapeutic inertia and improving HbA1c were those that empower nonphysician providers such as pharmacists, nurses and diabetes educators to initiate and intensify treatment independently, supported by appropriate guidelines.

Addressing Therapeutic Inertia in 2020 and Beyond: A 3-Year Initiative of the American Diabetes Association.

Research has shown that getting to glycemic targets early on leads to better outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes; yet, there has been no improvement in the attainment of A1C targets in the past decade. One reason is therapeutic inertia: the lack of timely adjustment to the treatment regimen when a person's therapeutic targets are not met. This article describes the scope and priorities of the American Diabetes Association's 3-year Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia Initiative. Its planned activities include publishing a systematic review and meta-analysis of approaches to reducing therapeutic inertia, developing a registry of effective strategies, launching clinician awareness and education campaigns, leveraging electronic health record and clinical decision-support tools, influencing payer policies, and potentially executing pragmatic research to test promising interventions.

Perceptions of disease state, treatment outcomes, and prognosis among patients with myelodysplastic syndromes: results from an internet-based survey.

PURPOSE: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) are a heterogenous group of clonal hematopoietic disorders affecting approximately 60,000 people in the U.S. Little information is available regarding how aware MDS patients are of their disease severity, prognosis, and treatment outcomes. METHODS: This Internet-based survey assessed patient perceptions regarding these factors, determined differences between patients with higher- and lower-risk disease and between those receiving active treatment and supportive care, and assessed patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Among 358 patients (median age, 65 years), the median time since MDS diagnosis was 3 years and time from initial hematologic abnormality detection was 6 years. Many patients (55%) did not know their International Prognostic Scoring System score, 42% were unaware of their blast percentage, and 28% were unaware of their cytogenetics. Patients were unlikely to recall having their MDS described as cancer (7%), 37% felt their treatment would improve survival, and 16% felt treatment would be curative. Patients receiving active treatment were more likely to believe their therapy would prolong survival than those receiving supportive care (52% versus 31%; p < .001) or be curative (23% versus 14%; p = .03). Patients with higher-risk disease were more likely to think their therapy would be curative than those with lower-risk disease (26% versus 11%; p = .01). Patients with MDS reported poor physical or mental health on two to three times more days per month than population norms. CONCLUSION: Patients with MDS have a limited understanding of their disease characteristics, prognosis, and treatment goals. These results may help improve physician-patient communication and identify factors to consider when making treatment decisions.