Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).

Current Practice of Podiatrists in Testing for Diabetic Polyneuropathy and Implementing Foot Care (PROTECT Study Survey 2).

AIMS: Podiatrists constitute a key member of a multidisciplinary foot care team, but their services remain underutilized. We sought to gain insights into the daily practice of podiatrists focusing on screening for and monitoring of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN) as well as foot management. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey included 125 podiatrists from 12 federal states across Germany who responded to an online questionnaire. RESULTS: The majority of patients treated in podiatry practices were referred by general practitioners and diabetologists. Screening for or follow-up of DSPN was performed by 36% of the respondents at least once a year, by 28% only at initial examination, by 21% only at suspicion, and by 10% basically at each treatment visit. Instruments to assess vibration, touch/pressure, and temperature sensation were used by 81% to 94% of the podiatrists. Previously undiagnosed DSPN and foot ulcers were detected frequently/very frequently (≥6 cases/mo) by 24.0 and 18.4% of the podiatrists, respectively. Almost all podiatrists advised daily self-monitoring of feet and appropriate foot care and >50% gave advice on medical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Podiatrists play an important role in the detection, monitoring, and management of both DSPN and diabetic foot ulcers, suggesting that the utilization of their services should be fostered.

Ankle reflex and neurological symptom score: a primary level screening method for diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Herein, we aimed to develop an easily available and efficient screening method for diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) suitable for primary care settings, emphasizing simplicity, speed, and accuracy. Nerve conduction studies were conducted on 214 patients with diabetes, encompassing the outcomes of five distinct assessments: diabetic neuropathy symptom (DNS), vibration perception threshold (VPT), and nerve screening. The diagnostic accuracy of the VPT and nerve screening was evaluated by comparing them with that of the nerve conduction study. To assess diagnostic efficacy, various combinations were examined, including DNS combined with VPT, pain, temperature, touch, and ankle reflex. The diagnostic performance of DNS was superior to that of the five neurological screening items and VPT, with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.68, 0.81, and 0.73, respectively. Among the two combined methods, "DNS + ankle reflex" was identified as having the highest diagnostic value, with an area under the curve, a sensitivity, a specificity, and an accuracy of 0.81, 0.89, 0.70, and 0.80, respectively. Furthermore, a combination of "DNS + ankle reflex + touch + pain + VPT" achieved the best performance among the five combinations, with an area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.85, 0.93, 0.68, and 0.81, respectively. The combination of DNS, ankle reflex, touch, pain, and VPT methods showed the highest diagnostic value for DPN. However, considering factors including accuracy, time, and economic cost, we recommend using a simpler combination of DNS and ankle reflex for large-scale screening of patients with DPN.

Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Prevention and Treatment.

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy occurs in up to 50% of patients with diabetes mellitus and increases the risk of diabetic foot ulcers and infections. Consistent screening and clear communication are essential to decrease disparities in assessment of neuropathic symptoms and diagnosis. Physicians should address underlying risk factors such as poor glycemic control, vitamin B12 deficiency, elevated blood pressure, and obesity to reduce the likelihood of developing neuropathy. First-line drug therapy for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy includes duloxetine, gabapentin, amitriptyline, and pregabalin; however, these medications do not restore sensation to affected extremities. Evidence for long-term benefit and safety of first-line treatment options is lacking. Second-line drug therapy includes nortriptyline, imipramine, venlafaxine, carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, topical lidocaine, and topical capsaicin. Periodic, objective monitoring of medication response is critical because patients may not obtain desired pain reduction, adverse effects are common, and serious adverse effects can occur. Opioids should generally be avoided. Nondrug therapies with low- to moderate-quality evidence include exercise and neuromodulation with spinal cord stimulation or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Peripheral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is well tolerated and inexpensive, but benefits are modest. Other treatments, such as acupuncture, alpha-lipoic acid, acetyl-L-carnitine, cannabidiol, and onabotulinumtoxinA need further study in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Digital Nerve Care Forum: Innovative Healthcare Professionals Education on Neuropathy.

Neuropathy is a common complication of diabetes, rarely detected on time, often deprioritized by treating physicians, and hence rarely managed in time, leading to avoidable complications which can be limb and life-threatening. Despite introducing new diagnostic tests, novel potential bio parameters, and a series of relatively small intervention studies utilizing detailed phenotypic profiling, the management of diabetic neuropathy (DN) and painful DN has remained unchanged due to misdiagnosis. The diagnostic complexity of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), variation in patient response to treatment, and regulatory pressures to meet data-driven quality metrics for diabetes management all likely contributes to the underdiagnosis and treatment of DPN in clinical practice. Educating the primary healthcare providers and diabetic trainers would help improve the number of diagnosed DPN cases as these practitioners lead public health literacy. The digital nerve care forum (NCF) is an educational initiative created by clinical experts and Procter and Gamble (P&G) health academy. Its primary aim is to generate awareness amongst healthcare practitioners (HCPs) about early diagnosis and timely management of DPN. Since its inception in October 2020, NCF has conducted 143 engagements; 39 neuropathy case puzzles, four interactive case-based discussions, two diagnostic workshops, four mentor-mentee nerve talk shows, two intercountry nerve talk shows, two global neuropathy awareness week initiatives, three nerves of steel (Women's Day special engagements), and 17 NCF times (Newsletters). This online forum is hosted on a global HCP education and upskilling platform, MediSage, which offers these educational resources to HCPs worldwide for free. It has helped create a community of 254, 714 HCPs from 86 countries across six continents supported by 30 neuropathy experts from seven countries. With a repeated viewership of 53% of HCPs engaging continuously, NCF empowers this community to improve diabetic patient care. Activities that increase disease awareness and highlight the importance of diabetic nerve health have been the key objectives behind the several educational programs on NCF. To drive this continuum, these digital programs are now becoming more phygital and impactful than ever. Therefore, earlier detection of DPN in at-risk individuals and those with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes is recommended for better management through optimal intervention and lifestyle changes and to prevent future complications of untreated DPN. How to cite this article: Kalra S, Tiwaskar M, Shrestha D, et al. Digital Nerve Care Forum: Innovative Healthcare Professionals Education on Neuropathy. J Assoc Physicians India 2023;71(10):89-92.

Updates on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Autonomic Neuropathies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Autonomic neuropathies are a complex group of disorders and result in diverse clinical manifestations that affect the cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, urogenital, and sudomotor systems. We focus this review on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral autonomic neuropathies. We summarize the diagnostic tools and current treatment options that will help the clinician care for individuals with peripheral autonomic neuropathies. RECENT FINDINGS: Autonomic neuropathies occur often in conjunction with somatic neuropathies but they can also occur in isolation. The autonomic reflex screen is a validated tool to assess sympathetic postganglionic sudomotor, cardiovascular sympathetic noradrenergic, and cardiac parasympathetic (i.e., cardiovagal) function. Initial laboratory evaluation for autonomic neuropathies includes fasting glucose or oral glucose tolerance test, thyroid function tests, kidney function tests, vitamin-B12, serum, and urine protein electrophoresis with immunofixation. Other laboratory tests should be guided by the clinical context. Reduced intraepidermal nerve density on skin biopsy is a finding, not a diagnosis. Skin biopsy can be helpful in selected individuals for the diagnosis of disorders affecting small nerve fibers; however, we strongly discourage the use of skin biopsy without clinical-physiological correlation. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring may lead to early identification of patients with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in the primary care setting. Disease-modifying therapies should be used when available in combination with nonpharmacological management and symptomatic pharmacologic therapies. Autonomic function testing can guide the therapeutic decisions and document improvement with treatment. A systematic approach guided by the autonomic history and standardized autonomic function testing may help clinicians when identifying and/or counseling patients with autonomic neuropathies. Treatment should be individualized and disease-modifying therapies should be used when available.

Peripheral Neuropathy: Evaluation and Differential Diagnosis.

Peripheral neuropathy, a common neurologic problem encountered by family physicians, can be classified clinically by the anatomic pattern of presenting symptoms and, if indicated, by results of electrodiagnostic studies for axonal and demyelinating disease. The prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in the general population ranges from 1% to 7%, with higher rates among those older than 50 years. Common identifiable causes include diabetes mellitus, nerve compression or injury, alcohol use, toxin exposure, hereditary diseases, and nutritional deficiencies. Peripheral neuropathy is idiopathic in 25% to 46% of cases. Diagnosis requires a comprehensive history, physical examination, and judicious laboratory testing. Early peripheral neuropathy may present as sensory alterations that are often progressive, including sensory loss, numbness, pain, or burning sensations in a "stocking and glove" distribution of the extremities. Later stages may involve proximal numbness, distal weakness, or atrophy. Physical examination should include a comprehensive neurologic and musculoskeletal evaluation. If the peripheral nervous system is identified as the likely source of the patient's symptoms, evaluation for potential underlying etiologies should initially focus on treatable causes. Initial laboratory evaluation includes a complete blood count; a comprehensive metabolic profile; fasting blood glucose, vitamin B12, and thyroid-stimulating hormone levels; and serum protein electrophoresis with immunofixation. If the initial evaluation is inconclusive, referral to a neurologist for additional testing (e.g., electrodiagnostic studies, specific antibody assays, nerve biopsy) should be considered. Treatment of peripheral neuropathy focuses on managing the underlying etiology. Several classes of medications, including gabapentinoids and antidepressants, can help alleviate neuropathic pain.

Diabetic amyotrophy: a painful radiculoplexus neuropathy.

Diabetic lumbosacral radiculoplexus neuropathy is a monophasic syndrome of diffuse pain and weakness that typically affects the lower limbs asymmetrically and is often associated with significant weight loss. Recovery can be prolonged and unpredictable. It is a clinical diagnosis and investigations are performed mainly to exclude other causes. Although it is most likely caused by a microvasculitis, there is no evidence to support using intravenous immunoglobulin or any long-term immunosuppression. Pulsed methylprednisolone may help pain if given within 2-3 months of symptom onset.

Neuropathy and Diabetic Foot Syndrome.

Diabetic foot ulceration is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus worldwide and the most common cause of hospitalization in diabetic patients. The etiology of diabetic foot ulcerations is complex due to their multifactorial nature; in the pathophysiology of diabetic foot ulceration polyneuropathy is important. Proper adherence to standard treatment strategies and interdisciplinary cooperation can reduce the still high rates of major amputations.

Pathways in the diagnosis and management of diabetic polyneuropathy.

Distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSPN), the most common form of diabetic neuropathy, has a complex pathophysiology and can be a major source of physical and psychologic disability. The management of DSPN can be frustrating for both patient and physician. This article provides a general overview of typical patient pathways in DSPN, and highlights variations in diagnosis, management, and referral patterns among different providers. DSPN is managed in several settings by primary care physicians (PCPs), specialists, and nurse practitioners. The initial clinical management of the patient is often dependent on the presenting complaint, the referral pattern of the provider, level of comfort of the PCP in managing diabetic complications, and geographic access to specialists. The primary treatment of DSPN focuses mainly on glycemic control and adjustment of modifiable risk factors, but other causes of neuropathy should also be investigated. Several pharmacologic agents are recommended by treatment guidelines, and as DSPN typically exists with comorbid conditions, a multimodal therapeutic approach should be considered. Barriers to effective management include failure to recognize DSPN, and misdiagnosis. Patient education also remains important. Referral patterns vary widely according to geographic location, access to services, provider preferences, and comfort in managing complex aspects of the disease. The variability in patient pathways affects patient education, satisfaction, and outcomes. Standardized screening tools, a multidisciplinary team approach, and treatment algorithms for diabetic neuropathy should improve future care. To improve patient outcomes, DSPN needs to be diagnosed sooner and interventions made before significant nerve damage occurs.

Duloxetine Compared with Pregabalin for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain Management in Patients with Suboptimal Pain Response to Gabapentin and Treated with or without Antidepressants: A Post Hoc Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of duloxetine vs. pregabalin in the treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP), comparing patient subgroups with and without concomitant antidepressant use. METHODS: This post hoc analysis assessed data from a randomized 12-week study that confirmed the noninferiority of duloxetine to pregabalin. In the previously published study, patients with DPNP with inadequate response to gabapentin were switched to duloxetine monotherapy, combination therapy of duloxetine plus gabapentin, or pregabalin monotherapy. Current, stable antidepressant use was allowed; 79 patients were concomitantly treated with antidepressants and 328 without antidepressants. In this post hoc analysis, improvement in the weekly mean of diary-based average daily pain ratings (numerical rating scale: 0-10) in antidepressant users and nonusers was analyzed using a longitudinal mixed-models repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis, including a test of the 3-way interaction (antidepressant subgroup by treatment by week) to assess whether the differences among treatment groups over 12 weeks differ between the antidepressant-use subgroups. RESULTS: The 3-way interaction was significant (P = 0.035), demonstrating that treatment-group differences in pain reduction over time differ between the subgroups. Among patients without antidepressant use, patients treated with duloxetine had significantly greater pain reduction than pregabalin at Week 4 and at each successive week up to the 12-week endpoint (-2.8 for duloxetine and -2.1 for pregabalin; P = 0.031); patients treated with duloxetine plus gabapentin had greater pain reduction than pregabalin at Weeks 2, 3, 5, and 7 to 9 (P ≤ 0.05) but not at endpoint (-2.4; P = 0.222). Among concomitant antidepressant users, no treatment-group differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DPNP inadequately treated with gabapentin without the concomitant use of antidepressants, switching to duloxetine instead of pregabalin may provide better pain reduction. Conversely, in nonresponders to gabapentin who are concomitantly using an antidepressant, switching to duloxetine or pregabalin may provide similar pain reductions.

Early Detection of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in Diabetic Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN) is a chronic complication in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients and is characterized by paresthesia, pain, and hypoesthesia of the extremities. The Diabetic Neuropathy Symptom-Score (DNS) is a quick, inexpensive, and easy-to-perform tool to detect DPN in clinical practice. Biochemical markers like Nitric Oxide (NO) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) play a role in the early detection of DPN. This study aims to investigate the relationship between risk factors and these biomarkers. So, it is expected to improve the prevention and treatment of diabetic neuropathy more effectively. METHOD: A cross-sectional method was used for this study. The sample size was 85 patients with T2DM who visited several primary healthcare in Medan, selected by consecutive sampling method based on eligibility criteria. Data collected included DNS, assessment of NO, VEGF, Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c), plasma blood glucose (PBG), and lipid profile. The collected data were analyzed using an independent T-test. RESULT: The results showed that most T2DM patients, namely 73 people (85.9%), experienced DPN. From the bivariate analysis results, the risk factors associated with the prevalence of DPN in T2DM patients were found to be increased levels of total cholesterol, HbA1c, NO, and VEGF (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, blood pressure, fasting BGL, HDL-C, LDL-C, and triglycerides were not related to the occurrence of DPN in this study (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: DNS can be used as a quick and easy initial screening tool implemented in clinical practice for screening DPN. Diabetic patients with DPN tend to have lower NO and increased VEGF; besides, NO levels are also associated with the progression of DPN. Furthermore, education, blood sugar control, and physical exercise, especially leg exercises, can prevent progressive DPN.

Effect of Multifactorial Balance Rehabilitation Program on Risk of Falls and Functional Fitness in Older Adults with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Increasing age and the added disadvantage of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) put the individual at a higher risk of falls and reduced functional fitness. However, there is a dearth of literature on multifactorial balance intervention, especially targeting the needs of older adults with DPN. OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to determine the effect of a multifactorial balance rehabilitation program on fall risk and functional fitness in older adults with DPN. METHODS: In this pre-post experimental study, 30 independently ambulating older adults (71.2 ± 4.70 years) with DPN, who were at risk of falling (timed up and go score ≥ 9.4 seconds), were recruited. Along with the standard care, all the participants received 12 weeks of the multifactorial balance rehabilitation program. RESULTS: Fall risk using the Fullerton Advanced Balance scale and functional fitness using the Senior Fitness Test were measured at baseline and after 12 weeks of the intervention. The intervention reduced the risk of falling score significantly (MD = 6.17, p < .001). All six parameters of functional fitness improved after 12 weeks of intervention. The improvement in lower limb strength (MD = 1.53 times), upper limb strength (MD = 2.48 times), endurance (MD = 16.07 seconds), lower limb flexibility (MD = 2.02 inches), upper limb flexibility (MD = 1.47 inches), and dynamic balance (MD = 1.53 seconds) was statistically significant at p < 0.05. CONCLUSION: This study provided encouraging evidence about the potential of multifactorial balance rehabilitation to reduce the risk of falling and improve functional fitness in older adults with DPN.

Screening for the loss of protective sensation in people without a history of diabetic foot ulceration: Validation of two simple tests in India.

The ability of the Ipswich touch test (IpTT) and VibratipTM to detect loss of protective sensation (LOPS) was tested against a neurothesiometer in an outpatient diabetic population without a history for ulceration. Our results support the use of the IpTT as a screening tool for LOPS, but not of VibratipTM.

Where does spinal cord stimulation fit into the international guidelines for refractory painful diabetic neuropathy? a consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Although pharmacotherapy with anticonvulsants and/or antidepressants can be effective for many people with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), albeit with frequent side-effects, a critical juncture occurs when neuropathic pain no longer responds to standard first- and second-step mono- and dual therapy and becomes refractory. Subsequent to these pharmacotherapeutic approaches, third-line treatment options for PDN may include opioids (short-term), capsaicin 8% patches, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). AIM: This document summarizes consensus recommendations regarding appropriate treatment for refractory peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PDN), based on outcomes from an expert panel convened on December 10, 2022, as part of the Worldwide Initiative for Diabetes Education Virtual Global Summit, "Advances in the Management of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy." PARTICIPANTS: Nine attendees, eminent physicians and academics, comprising six diabetes specialists, two pain specialists, and one health services expert. EVIDENCE: For individuals with refractory PDN, opioids are a high-risk option that do not provide a long-term solution and should not be used. For appropriately selected individuals, SCS is an effective, safe, and durable treatment option. In particular, high-frequency (HF) SCS (10 kHz) shows strong efficacy and improves quality of life. To ensure treatment success, strict screening criteria should be used to prioritize candidates for SCS. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Each participant voiced their opinion after reviewing available data, and a verbal consensus was reached during the meeting. CONCLUSION: Globally, the use of opioids should rarely be recommended for refractory, severe PDN. Based on increasing clinical evidence, SCS, especially HF-SCS, should be considered as a treatment for PDN that is not responsive to first- or second-line monotherapy/dual therapy.

[Chronic complications of diabetes mellitus. Recommendations from the American Diabetes Association 2011. Prevention and management]. / Complicaciones crónicas de la diabetes mellitus. Recomendaciones de la American Diabetes Association (ADA) 2011. Prevención y manejo.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the diseases with greater impact public health, not only because of its high prevalence, but, above all, by the consequences of the chronic complications arising from this disease. Hyperglycemia generates damage both in the field of microcirculation and the great vessels causing injury, macroangiopathies and microangiopathies. Macroangiopathies complications are generated from alterations or injury in the great vessels of the arterial to the most important, being from the clinical point of view, ischemic heart disease, disease stroke and peripheral arterial disease. Microangiopathies complications are due to alterations or injury of small vessels being the most important, from a clinical point of view, nephropathy, retinopathy and diabetic neuropathy. Macroangiopathies complications are generated from alterations or injury in the great vessels of the arterial to the most important, being from the clinical point of view, ischemic heart disease, disease stroke and peripheral arterial disease. Microangiopathies complications are due to alterations or injury of small vessels being the most important, from a clinical point of view, nephropathy, retinopathy and diabetic neuropathy.

Accuracy and Cost-effectiveness of the Diabetic Foot Screen Proforma in Detection of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in Myanmar.

Objective: Proper foot assessment is important for early detection and treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), the main cause of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). This study aimed to determine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of the locally developed Diabetic Foot Screen (DFS) proforma in detecting DPN among diabetic patients at 10 selected clinics in Yangon, Myanmar. Methodology: The study included 625 type 2 diabetics from 10 primary care clinics who participated in the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness analysis. They were assessed with DFS proforma and biothesiometry by two examiners independently. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted based on available data in the local primary care setting. Results: The overall accuracy of the DFS proforma assessment was 74.76% (95% CI: 70.46%- 79.06%). The optimal cut-off DFS score was ≥1.5 (sensitivity 62%; specificity 76%) in detecting DPN. Compared to biothesiometry, the cost-effectiveness of DFS proforma assessment in DPN detection was 41.79 USD per DPN case detected. Conclusion: This study supported the use of DFS proforma for DPN detection in primary care clinics. It also provided new information on the estimated costs per patient with DPN detected in Myanmar.

Towards prevention of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: clinical presentation, pathogenesis, and new treatments.

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) occurs in up to half of individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. DPN results from the distal-to-proximal loss of peripheral nerve function, leading to physical disability and sometimes pain, with the consequent lowering of quality of life. Early diagnosis improves clinical outcomes, but many patients still develop neuropathy. Hyperglycaemia is a risk factor and glycaemic control prevents DPN development in type 1 diabetes. However, glycaemic control has modest or no benefit in individuals with type 2 diabetes, probably because they usually have comorbidities. Among them, the metabolic syndrome is a major risk factor for DPN. The pathophysiology of DPN is complex, but mechanisms converge on a unifying theme of bioenergetic failure in the peripheral nerves due to their unique anatomy. Current clinical management focuses on controlling diabetes, the metabolic syndrome, and pain, but remains suboptimal for most patients. Thus, research is ongoing to improve early diagnosis and prognosis, to identify molecular mechanisms that could lead to therapeutic targets, and to investigate lifestyle interventions to improve clinical outcomes.