Determinants of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus in Brazil: A sub-analysis of the longitudinal data from the BrazIian type 1 & 2 diabetes disease registry (BINDER).

BACKGROUND: Data on glycemic control and its determinants among Brazilian patients with type-2 diabetes (DM2) are scarce. The BrazIliaN Type 1 & 2 DiabetEs Disease Registry (BINDER) is a multicenter, longitudinal study, designed to investigate the glycemic control in a real-word scenario. METHODS: 1142 patients participated in the five visits of the BINDER study between April/2017 and October/2019. For each visit, glycemic control was assessed using the last measure available for HbA1c. Sociodemographic and anthropometric characteristics were also analyzed. RESULTS: At baseline, the median HbA1c level was 7.1% (4.1-15.0%); 259 (31.4%) participants had HbA1c ≤ 6.5% and 396 (48.2%) had HbA1c ≤ 7.0%. Younger age (p = 0.014), low educational level (p = 0.025) and the type of healthcare service (public sector; p = 0.0058) were independently associated with the elevated HbA1c. After 2 years, there were no statistically significant differences in HbA1c median values in relation to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of DM2 patients, younger age, low educational level and being treated at the public service were associated with worse glycemic control. Over a 2-year follow-up, there was no significant change in the median HbA1c. These findings suggest that strategies are needed to improve glycemic control, especially in those treated in the public service.

BrazIliaN Type 1 & 2 DiabetEs Disease Registry (BINDER): longitudinal, real-world study of diabetes mellitus control in Brazil.

Introduction: This study aimed at assessing the patterns of care and glycemic control of patients with diabetes (DM) in real life during a follow-up of 2 years in the public and private health sectors in Brazil. Methods: BINDER was an observational study of patients >18 years old, with type-1 (T1DM) and type-2 DM (T2DM), followed at 250 sites from 40 cities across the five regions of Brazil. The results for the 1,266 participants who were followed for 2 years are presented. Main results: Most patients were Caucasians (75%), male (56.7%) and from the private health sector (71%). Of the 1,266 patients who entered the analysis, 104 (8.2%) had T1DM and 1162 (91.8%) had T2DM. Patients followed in the private sector represented 48% of the patients with T1DM and 73% of those with T2DM. For T1DM, in addition to insulins (NPH in 24%, regular in 11%, long-acting analogues in 58%, fast-acting analogues in 53%, and others in 12%), the patients received biguanide (20%), SGLT2-I (4%), and GLP-1Ra (<1%). After 2 years, 13% of T1DM patients were using biguanide, 9% SGLT2-I, 1% GLP-1Ra, and 1% pioglitazone; the use of NPH and regular insulins decreased to 13% and 8%, respectively, while 72% were receiving long-acting insulin analogues, and 78% fast-acting insulin analogues. Treatment for T2DM consisted of biguanide (77%), sulfonylureas (33%), DPP4 inhibitors (24%), SGLT2-I (13%), GLP-1Ra (2.5%), and insulin (27%), with percentages not changing during follow-up. Regarding glucose control, mean HbA1c at baseline and after 2 years of follow-up was 8.2 (1.6)% and 7.5 (1.6)% for T1DM, and 8.4 (1.9)% and 7.2 (1.3)% for T2DM, respectively. After 2 years, HbA1c<7% was reached in 25% of T1DM and 55% of T2DM patients from private institutions and in 20.5% of T1DM and 47% of T2DM from public institutions. Conclusion: Most patients did not reach the HbA1c target in private or public health systems. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no significant improvements in HbA1c in either T1DM or T2DM, which suggests an important clinical inertia.

Barriers to insulin initiation in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Brazil.

AIMS: We aimed to explore insulin initiation barriers in the Brazilian Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) elderly population, according to the physician's perspective, and suggest strategies to overcome them. METHODS: A 45-questions survey addressing issues as clinical characteristics, barriers to insulinization, and treatment strategies in elderly patients with T2DM, was sent to six endocrinologists from different Brazilian locations. Thereafter, all the respondents participated in a panel discussion to validate their responses and collect additional relevant data. RESULTS: Endocrinologists had at least 15 years of experience, with a mean of 63 elderly patients per month. Nearly 25% of the elderly patients were treated in the Brazilian public healthcare system (SUS, Unified Health System); only a quarter presented proper glycemic control. In contrast, 55% of the patients from private healthcare system presented adequate glycemic control. The main barriers for insulin initiation for patients, according to physicians' perspective, are side effects and negative perception over treatment (100%). For endocrinologists, main barriers were lack of time to guide patients and concern over side effects (83%). Therefore, specialists considered education for both healthcare professionals and patients as one of the most important strategies to circumvent the current scenario related insulin therapy among elderly patients in the country. CONCLUSION: Insulin therapy remains underused due to several barriers, such as concern over side effects and negative perception. Educational measures for patients and HCPs could improve the current scenario.