Type 2 Diabetes.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a prevalent disease that increases risk for vascular, renal, and neurologic complications. Prevention and treatment of T2D and its complications are paramount. Many advancements in T2D care have emerged over the past 5 years, including increased understanding of the importance of early intensive glycemic control, mental health, social determinants of health, healthy eating patterns, continuous glucose monitoring, and the benefits of some drugs for preventing cardiorenal disease. This review summarizes the evidence supporting T2D prevention and treatment, focusing on aspects that are commonly in the purview of primary care physicians.

Collaborative Care Cost-Sharing and Referral Rates in Colorado.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care integrates mental health treatment into primary care and has been shown effective. Yet even in states where its use has been encouraged, take-up remains low and there are potential financial barriers to care. OBJECTIVE: Describe patient out-of-pocket costs and variations in referral patterns for collaborative care in Colorado. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective observational study using administrative medical claims data to identify outpatient visits with collaborative care. For individuals with ≥1 visit, we measure spending and visits at the month level. Among physicians with billings for collaborative care, we measure prevalence of eligible patients with collaborative care utilization. SUBJECTS: Patients with Medicare, Medicare Advantage, or commercial health insurance in Colorado, 2018-2019. OUTCOMES: Out-of-pocket costs (enrollee payments to clinicians), total spending (insurer+enrollee payments to clinicians), percent of patients billed collaborative care. RESULTS: Median total spending (insurer+patient cost) was $48.32 (IQR: $41-$53). Median out-of-pocket cost per month in collaborative care was $8.35 per visit (IQR: $0-$10). Patients with commercial insurance paid the most per month (median: $15); patients with Medicare Advantage paid the least (median: $0). Among clinicians billing for collaborative care (n=193), a mean of 12 percent of eligible patients utilized collaborative care; family practice and advanced practice clinicians' patients utilized it most often. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care remains underused with fewer than 1 in 6 potentially eligible patients receiving care in this setting. Out-of-pocket costs varied, though were generally low; uncertainty about costs may contribute to low uptake.

Food Insecurity and Hypoglycemia among Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Insulin or Sulfonylureas: The Diabetes & Aging Study.

BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemia is a serious adverse drug event associated with hypoglycemia-prone medications; older patients with diabetes are particularly at high risk. Economic food insecurity (food insecurity due to financial limitations) is a known risk factor for hypoglycemia; however, less is known about physical food insecurity (due to difficulty cooking or shopping for food), which may increase with age, and its association with hypoglycemia. OBJECTIVE: Study associations between food insecurity and severe hypoglycemia. DESIGN: Survey based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Survey responses were collected in 2019 from 1,164 older (≥ 65 years) patients with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin or sulfonylureas. MAIN MEASURES: Risk ratios (RR) for economic and physical food insecurity associated with self-reported severe hypoglycemia (low blood glucose requiring assistance) adjusted for age, financial strain, HbA1c, Charlson comorbidity score and frailty. Self-reported reasons for hypoglycemia endorsed by respondents. KEY RESULTS: Food insecurity was reported by 12.3% of the respondents; of whom 38.4% reported economic food insecurity only, 21.1% physical food insecurity only and 40.5% both. Economic food insecurity and physical food insecurity were strongly associated with severe hypoglycemia (RR = 4.3; p = 0.02 and RR = 4.4; p = 0.002, respectively). Missed meals ("skipped meals, not eating enough or waiting too long to eat") was the dominant reason (77.5%) given for hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoglycemia prevention efforts among older patients with diabetes using hypoglycemia-prone medications should address food insecurity. Standard food insecurity questions, which are used to identify economic food insecurity, will fail to identify patients who have physical food insecurity only.

Updating and calibrating the Real-World Progression In Diabetes (RAPIDS) model in a non-Veterans Affairs population.

OBJECTIVES: To present the Real-World Progression In Diabetes (RAPIDS) 2.0 Risk Engine, the only simulation model to study the long-term trajectories of outcomes arising from dynamic sequences of glucose-lowering treatments in type 2 diabetes (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The RAPIDS model's risk equations were re-estimated using a Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO)-based regularization of features that spanned baseline data from the last two quarters of current time and interactions with age. These equations were supplemented with estimates for the impact of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor classes of drugs as monotherapies and their combinations with metformin based on newer trial data and comprehensive meta-analyses. The probabilistic RAPIDS 2.0 model was calibrated (N = 25 000) and validated (N = 263 816) using electronic medical records (EMR) data between 2008 and 2021 from a national network of US healthcare organizations. RESULTS: The EMR-based cohort had a mean age of 61 years at baseline, with 50% women, 70% non-Hispanic White individuals and 20% non-Hispanic Black individuals, and was followed for 17.5 quarters (range: 3-50). The final RAPIDS 2.0 risk engine accurately predicted the long-term trajectories of all nine biomarkers and nine outcomes in the hold-out validation sample. Similar accuracies in predictions were observed in each of the 14 subgroups studied. CONCLUSION: The RAPIDS 2.0 model demonstrated valid long-term predictions of outcomes in individuals with T2DM in the United States as a function of dynamic sequences of treatment use patterns. This highlights its potential to project long-term comparative effectiveness between alternative sequences of glucose-lowering treatment uses in the United States.

5-Year simulation of diabetes-related complications in people treated with tirzepatide or semaglutide versus insulin glargine.

AIM: This study compared the 5-year incidence rate of macrovascular and microvascular complications for tirzepatide, semaglutide and insulin glargine in individuals with type 2 diabetes, using the Building, Relating, Assessing, and Validating Outcomes (BRAVO) diabetes simulation model. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a 5-year SURPASS-2 trial extrapolation, with an insulin glargine arm added as an additional comparator. The 1-year treatment effects of tirzepatide (5, 10 or 15 mg), semaglutide (1 mg) and insulin glargine on glycated haemoglobin, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein and body weights were obtained from the SUSTAIN-4 and SURPASS-2 trials. We used the BRAVO model to predict 5-year complications for each study arm under two scenarios: the 1-year treatment effects persisted (optimistic) or diminished to none in 5 years (conservative). RESULTS: When compared with insulin glargine, we projected a 5-year risk reduction in cardiovascular adverse events [rate ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.67] and microvascular composite (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.64-0.70) with 15 mg tirzepatide, and 5-year risk reduction in cardiovascular adverse events (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.72-0.79) and microvascular composite (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.82) with semaglutide (1 mg) under an optimistic scenario. Lower doses of tirzepatide also had similar, albeit smaller benefits. Treatment effects for tirzepatide and semaglutide were smaller but still significantly higher than insulin glargine under a conservative scenario. The 5-year risk reduction in diabetes-related complication events and mortality for the 15 mg tirzepatide compared with insulin glargine ranged from 49% to 10% under an optimistic scenario, which was reduced by 17%-33% when a conservative scenario was assumed. CONCLUSION: With the use of the BRAVO diabetes model, tirzepatide and semaglutide exhibited potential to reduce the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications among individuals with type 2 diabetes, compared with insulin glargine in a 5-year window. Based on the current modelling assumptions, tirzepatide (15 mg) may potentially outperform semaglutide (1 mg). While the BRAVO model offered insights, the long-term cardiovascular benefit of tirzepatide should be further validated in a prospective clinical trial.

A novel Project ECHO curriculum on older adult pain management and opioid use disorder for outpatient clinicians.

Chronic pain, opioid use, and opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasingly common in older adults. Outpatient clinician education may improve outcomes. Our aim was to create and evaluate a novel curriculum for outpatient clinicians on older adult pain management, opioid prescribing, and OUD leveraging Project ECHO®, a model for delivering subspecialized medical knowledge to community outpatient clinicians via videoconferencing.The series is comprised of 8-hour-long sessions, each with an expert-led interactive lectures followed by participant-led case discussions. Topics include pain assessment & treatment, considerations in older adults (e.g. cognition, caregiver support), shared decision-making, behavioral health, and OUD diagnosis and treatment.Sixty-nine clinicians attended the series and completed the pre-series survey; 78% (n = 54) completed the post-series survey. Clinicians reported a significant increase in self-efficacy in 14/14 queried competencies and greater frequency of performing 7/10 practice behaviors regarding older adult pain management, opioid prescribing, and OUD management. The most liked curricular components were opportunities to learn with subspecialists and discussions with other community clinicians. Qualitative analysis suggests that clinicians may benefit from education on specific geriatrics-related content areas.This novel curriculum has potential to improve management of older adult chronic pain, opioid prescribing, and OUD in a virtual and scalable format.

Revisiting the Time Needed to Provide Adult Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Many patients do not receive guideline-recommended preventive, chronic disease, and acute care. One potential explanation is insufficient time for primary care providers (PCPs) to provide care. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the time needed to provide 2020 preventive care, chronic disease care, and acute care for a nationally representative adult patient panel by a PCP alone, and by a PCP as part of a team-based care model. DESIGN: Simulation study applying preventive and chronic disease care guidelines to hypothetical patient panels. PARTICIPANTS: Hypothetical panels of 2500 patients, representative of the adult US population based on the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. MAIN MEASURES: The mean time required for a PCP to provide guideline-recommended preventive, chronic disease and acute care to the hypothetical patient panels. Estimates were also calculated for visit documentation time and electronic inbox management time. Times were re-estimated in the setting of team-based care. KEY RESULTS: PCPs were estimated to require 26.7 h/day, comprising of 14.1 h/day for preventive care, 7.2 h/day for chronic disease care, 2.2 h/day for acute care, and 3.2 h/day for documentation and inbox management. With team-based care, PCPs were estimated to require 9.3 h per day (2.0 h/day for preventive care and 3.6 h/day for chronic disease care, 1.1 h/day for acute care, and 2.6 h/day for documentation and inbox management). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs do not have enough time to provide the guideline-recommended primary care. With team-based care the time requirements would decrease by over half, but still be excessive.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Medication Initiation Among Adults Newly Diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Given persistent racial/ethnic differences in type 2 diabetes outcomes and the lasting benefits conferred by early glycemic control, we examined racial/ethnic differences in diabetes medication initiation during the year following diagnosis. METHODS: Among adults newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (2005-2016), we examined how glucose-lowering medication initiation differed by race/ethnicity during the year following diagnosis. We specified modified Poisson regression models to estimate the association between race/ethnicity and medication initiation in the entire cohort and within subpopulations defined by HbA1c, BMI, age at diagnosis, comorbidity, and neighborhood deprivation index (a census tract-level socioeconomic indicator). RESULTS: Among the 77,199 newly diagnosed individuals, 47% started a diabetes medication within 12 months of diagnosis. The prevalence of medication initiation ranged from 32% among Chinese individuals to 58% among individuals of Other/Unknown races/ethnicities. Compared to White individuals, medication initiation was less likely among Chinese (relative risk: 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.72, 0.84)) and Japanese (0.82 (0.75, 0.90)) individuals, but was more likely among Hispanic/Latinx (1.27 (1.24, 1.30)), African American (1.14 (1.11, 1.17)), other Asian (1.13 (1.08, 1.18)), South Asian (1.10 (1.04, 1.17)), Other/Unknown (1.31 (1.24, 1.39)), American Indian or Alaska Native (1.11 (1.04, 1.18)), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (1.28 (1.19, 1.37)) individuals. Racial/ethnic differences dissipated among individuals with higher HbA1c values. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of glucose-lowering treatment during the year following type 2 diabetes diagnosis differed markedly by race/ethnicity, particularly for those with lower HbA1c values. Future research should examine how patient preferences, provider implicit bias, and shared decision-making contribute to these early treatment differences.

Development and Validation of the Life Expectancy Estimator for Older Adults with Diabetes (LEAD): the Diabetes and Aging Study.

BACKGROUND: Estimated life expectancy for older patients with diabetes informs decisions about treatment goals, cancer screening, long-term and advanced care, and inclusion in clinical trials. Easily implementable, evidence-based, diabetes-specific approaches for identifying patients with limited life expectancy are needed. OBJECTIVE: Develop and validate an electronic health record (EHR)-based tool to identify older adults with diabetes who have limited life expectancy. DESIGN: Predictive modeling based on survival analysis using Cox-Gompertz models in a retrospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with diabetes aged ≥ 65 years from Kaiser Permanente Northern California: a 2015 cohort (N = 121,396) with follow-up through 12/31/2019, randomly split into training (N = 97,085) and test (N = 24,311) sets. Validation was conducted in the test set and two temporally distinct cohorts: a 2010 cohort (n = 89,563; 10-year follow-up through 2019) and a 2019 cohort (n = 152,357; 2-year follow-up through 2020). MAIN MEASURES: Demographics, diagnoses, utilization and procedures, medications, behaviors and vital signs; mortality. KEY RESULTS: In the training set (mean age 75 years; 49% women; 48% racial and ethnic minorities), 23% died during 5 years follow-up. A mortality prediction model was developed using 94 candidate variables, distilled into a life expectancy model with 11 input variables, and transformed into a risk-scoring tool, the Life Expectancy Estimator for Older Adults with Diabetes (LEAD). LEAD discriminated well in the test set (C-statistic = 0.78), 2010 cohort (C-statistic = 0.74), and 2019 cohort (C-statistic = 0.81); comparisons of observed and predicted survival curves indicated good calibration. CONCLUSIONS: LEAD estimates life expectancy in older adults with diabetes based on only 11 patient characteristics widely available in most EHRs and claims data. LEAD is simple and has potential application for shared decision-making, clinical trial inclusion, and resource allocation.

Pragmatic Clinical Trial of Population Health, Portal-Based Depression Screening: the PORTAL-Depression Study.

BACKGROUND: A population health approach to depression screening using patient portals may be a promising strategy to proactively engage and identify patients with depression. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a population health approach to depression screening is more effective than screening during clinic appointments alone for identifying patients with depression. DESIGN: A pragmatic clinical trial at an adult outpatient internal medicine clinic at an urban, academic, tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Eligible patients (n = 2713) were adults due for depression screening with active portal accounts. Patients with documented depression or bipolar disorder and those who had been screened in the year prior to the study were excluded. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to usual (n = 1372) or population healthcare (n = 1341). For usual care, patients were screened by medical assistants during clinic appointments. Population healthcare patients were sent letters through the portal inviting them to fill out an online screener regardless of whether they had a scheduled appointment. The same screening tool, the Computerized Adaptive Test for Mental Health (CAT-MH™), was used for clinic- and portal-based screening. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the depression screening rate. KEY RESULTS: The depression screening rate in the population healthcare arm was higher than that in the usual care arm (43% (n = 578) vs. 33% (n = 459), p < 0.0001). The rate of positive screens was also higher in the population healthcare arm compared to that in the usual care (10% (n = 58) vs. 4% (n = 17), p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest depression screening via a portal as part of a population health approach can increase screening and case identification, compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03832283.

The Effects of Patient Characteristics on the Management of Subclinical Hypothyroidism: A Survey of Faculty and Trainees.

OBJECTIVE: There is no universal approach to the management of subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH). This study was designed to determine the impact of patient characteristics on management decisions in SCH amongst physician faculty members and trainees. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to faculty members and medical trainees (ie, interns, residents, and fellows) at multiple academic medical centers. The survey included 9 clinical scenarios describing women with SCH with 5 management options sequenced from most "conservative" (no further treatment or monitoring) to most "aggressive" (treatment with levothyroxine). RESULTS: Of the 194 survey respondents, 95 (49.0%) were faculty members and 99 (51.0%) were trainees. Faculty members were more likely to report being "confident" or "very confident" in making the diagnosis of SCH compared to trainees (95.8% vs 46.5%, P < .001). Faculty members were also more likely to consider patient preference for treatment (60.0% vs 32.3%, P < .001). Among all respondents, the clinical factors that resulted in the highest predicted probability of treatment were hypothyroid symptoms (predicted probability [PP] 68.8%, 95% CI [65.7%-71.9%]), thyroid stimulating hormone >10 mIU/L in a 31-year-old (PP 63.9%, 95% CI [60.3%-67.3%]), and the desire for fertility (PP 52.2%, 95% CI [48.6%-56.0%]). In general, faculty members favored more aggressive treatment across all clinical scenarios. CONCLUSION: The presence of symptoms, thyroid stimulating hormone >10 mIU/L, and desire for fertility were most predictive of the decision to treat in SCH. In several clinical scenarios, both trainee and faculty decision-making demonstrated discordance with general SCH management principles.

First-Line Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes With Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists : A Cost-Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP1) receptor agonists as second-line therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. Expanding their use as first-line therapy has been proposed but the clinical benefits may not outweigh their costs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a strategy of first-line SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP1 receptor agonists. DESIGN: Individual-level Monte Carlo-based Markov model. DATA SOURCES: Randomized trials, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention databases, RED BOOK, and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. TARGET POPULATION: Drug-naive U.S. patients with type 2 diabetes. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: First-line SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP1 receptor agonists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Life expectancy, lifetime costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: First-line SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1 receptor agonists had lower lifetime rates of congestive heart failure, ischemic heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke compared with metformin. First-line SGLT2 inhibitors cost $43 000 more and added 1.8 quality-adjusted months versus first-line metformin ($478 000 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). First-line injectable GLP1 receptor agonists cost more and reduced QALYs compared with metformin. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: By removing injection disutility, first-line GLP1 receptor agonists were no longer dominated (ICER, $327 000 per QALY). Oral GLP1 receptor agonists were not cost-effective (ICER, $823 000 per QALY). To be cost-effective at under $150 000 per QALY, costs for SGLT2 inhibitors would need to be under $5 per day and under $6 per day for oral GLP1 receptor agonists. LIMITATION: U.S. population and costs not generalizable internationally. CONCLUSION: As first-line agents, SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1 receptor agonists would improve type 2 diabetes outcomes, but their costs would need to fall by at least 70% to be cost-effective. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: American Diabetes Association.

Screening for Emotional Distress in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this article, we discuss the relationship between emotional distress and common cardiovascular disease condition, including coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, mechanical circulatory support, and heart transplant. We review screening measures that have been studied and used in clinical practice for each condition, as well as priorities for future research. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies consistently demonstrate failing to identify and treat emotional distress in patients with cardiovascular disease is associated with adverse outcomes. However, routine emotional distress screening is not formally recommended for all cardiovascular disease conditions and is limited to depression screening in select patient populations. Future research should focus on evaluating the validity and reliability of standardized screening measures across the scope of emotional distress in patients with or at risk for cardiovascular disease. Other areas of future research include implementation of evidence-based pharmaceutical treatments and integrated behavioral health approaches and interventions.

Quality of Care for US Adults With Medicaid Insurance and Type 2 Diabetes in Federally Qualified Health Centers Compared With Other Primary Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate indicators of diabetes quality of care for US nonelderly, adult Medicaid enrollees with type 2 diabetes and compare federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) versus non-FQHCs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed diabetes process measures and acute health services utilization with 2012 US fee-for-service and managed care Medicaid claims in all 50 states and DC. We compared FQHC (N=121,977) to non-FQHC patients (N=700,401) using propensity scores to balance covariates and generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: Overall, laboratory-based process measures occurred more frequently (range, 65.7%-76.6%) than measures requiring specialty referrals (retinal examinations, 33.3%; diabetes education, 3.4%). Compared with non-FQHC patients, FQHC patients had about 3 percentage point lower rates of each process measure, except for higher rates of diabetes education [relative risk=1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.16]. FQHC patients had fewer overall [incident rate ratio (IRR)=0.87, 95% CI: 0.86-0.88] and diabetes-related hospitalizations (IRR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.77-0.81), but more overall (IRR=1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07) and diabetes-related emergency department visits (IRR=1.10, 95% CI: 1.08-1.13). CONCLUSIONS: This national analysis identified opportunities to improve diabetes management among Medicaid enrollees with type 2 diabetes, especially for retinal examinations or diabetes education. Overall, we found slightly lower rates of most diabetes care process measures for FQHC patients versus non-FQHC patients. Despite having higher rates of emergency department visits, FQHC patients were significantly less likely to be hospitalized than non-FQHC patients. These findings emphasize the need to identify innovative, effective approaches to improve diabetes care for Medicaid enrollees, especially in FQHC settings.

Elements of Integrated Behavioral Health Associated with Primary Care Provider Confidence in Managing Depression at Community Health Centers.

BACKGROUND: Depression is most often treated by primary care providers (PCPs), but low self-efficacy in caring for depression may impede adequate management. We aimed to identify which elements of integrated behavioral health (BH) were associated with greater confidence among PCPs in identifying and managing depression. DESIGN: Mailed cross-sectional surveys in 2016. PARTICIPANTS: BH leaders and PCPs caring for adult patients at community health centers (CHCs) in 10 midwestern states. MAIN MEASURES: Survey items asked about depression screening, systems to support care, availability and integration of BH, and PCP attitudes and experiences. PCPs rated their confidence in diagnosing, assessing severity, providing counseling, and prescribing medication for depression on a 5-point scale. An overall confidence score was calculated (range 4 (low) to 20 (high)). Multilevel linear mixed models were used to identify factors associated with confidence. KEY RESULTS: Response rates were 60% (N=77/128) and 52% (N=538/1039) for BH leaders and PCPs, respectively. Mean overall confidence score was 15.25±2.36. Confidence was higher among PCPs who were satisfied with the accuracy of depression screening (0.38, p=0.01), worked at CHCs with depression tracking systems (0.48, p=0.045), had access to patients' BH treatment plans (1.59, p=0.002), and cared for more patients with depression (0.29, p=0.003). PCPs who reported their CHC had a sufficient number of psychiatrists were more confident diagnosing depression (0.20, p=0.02) and assessing severity (0.24, p=0.03). Confidence in prescribing was lower at CHCs with more patients living below poverty (-0.66, p<0.001). Confidence in diagnosing was lower at CHCs with more Black/African American patients (-0.20, p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs who had access to BH treatment plans, a system for tracking patients with depression, screening protocols, and a sufficient number of psychiatrists were more confident identifying and managing depression. Efforts are needed to address disparities and support PCPs caring for vulnerable patients with depression.

The Longer-Term Benefits and Harms of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses of the benefits and harms of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) have been limited to specific outcomes and comparisons and often included short-term results. We aimed to estimate the longer-term effects of GLP1RAs on cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular and macrovascular complications, mortality, and adverse events in patients with type 2 diabetes, compared to placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and clinicaltrials.gov (inception-July 2019) for randomized controlled trials ≥ 52 weeks' duration that compared a GLP1RA to placebo or other anti-hyperglycemic medication and included at least one outcome of interest. Outcomes included cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular and macrovascular complications, all-cause mortality, and treatment-related adverse events. We performed random effects meta-analyses to give summary estimates using weighted mean differences (MD) and pooled relative risks (RR). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias in randomized trials tool. Quality of evidence was summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The study was registered a priori with PROSPERO (CRD42018090506). RESULTS: Forty-five trials with a mean duration of 1.7 years comprising 71,517 patients were included. Compared to placebo, GLP1RAs reduced cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular complications (including renal events, RR 0.85, 0.80-0.90), macrovascular complications (including stroke, RR 0.86, 0.78-0.95), and mortality (RR 0.89, 0.84-0.94). Compared to other anti-hyperglycemic medications, GLP1RAs only reduced cardiovascular risk factors. Increased gastrointestinal events causing treatment discontinuation were observed in both comparisons. DISCUSSION: GLP1RAs reduced cardiovascular risk factors and increased gastrointestinal events compared to placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications. GLP1RAs also reduced MACE, stroke, renal events, and mortality in comparisons with placebo; however, analyses were inconclusive for comparisons with other anti-hyperglycemic medications. Given the high costs of GLP1RAs, the lack of long-term evidence comparing GLP1RAs to other anti-hyperglycemic medications has significant policy and clinical practice implications.

Longer-term Benefits and Risks of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2Is) are a recent class of medication approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Previous meta-analyses have quantified the benefits and harms of SGLT2Is; however, these analyses have been limited to specific outcomes and comparisons and included trials of short duration. We comprehensively reviewed the longer-term benefits and harms of SGLT2Is compared to placebo or other anti-hyperglycemic medications. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to July 2019 for randomized controlled trials of minimum 52 weeks' duration that enrolled adults with T2D, compared an SGLT2I to either placebo or other anti-hyperglycemic medications, and reported at least one outcome of interest including cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular and macrovascular complications, mortality, and adverse events. We conducted random effects meta-analyses to provide summary estimates using weighted mean differences (MD) and pooled relative risks (RR). The study was registered a priori with PROSPERO (CRD42018090506). RESULTS: Fifty articles describing 39 trials (vs. placebo, n = 28; vs. other anti-hyperglycemic medication, n = 12; vs. both, n = 1) and 112,128 patients were included in our analyses. Compared to placebo, SGLT2Is reduced cardiovascular risk factors (e.g., hemoglobin A1c, MD - 0.55%, 95% CI - 0.62, - 0.49), macrovascular outcomes (e.g., hospitalization for heart failure, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62, 0.78), and mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80, 0.94). Compared to other anti-hyperglycemic medications, SGLT2Is reduced cardiovascular risk factors, but insufficient data existed for other outcomes. About a fourfold increased risk of genital yeast infections for both genders was observed for comparisons vs. placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications. DISCUSSION: We found that SGLT2Is led to durable reductions in cardiovascular risk factors compared to both placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications. Reductions in macrovascular complications and mortality were only observed in comparisons with placebo, although trials comparing SGLT2Is vs. other anti-hyperglycemic medications were not designed to assess longer-term outcomes.

Brain Fog in Hypothyroidism: Understanding the Patient's Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-centered studies have shown that several patients on thyroid hormone replacement therapy for hypothyroidism exhibit persistent symptoms, including "brain fog." Here, we aimed to determine which of these specific symptoms are associated with brain fog, identify patient-reported factors that modify these symptoms, and identify patient concerns related to brain fog not included in thyroid-specific questionnaires. METHODS: A survey on brain fog symptoms adapted from thyroid-specific patient-reported outcome was distributed online. Textual data analysis was performed to identify common areas of concern from open-ended survey responses. RESULTS: A total of 5170 participants reporting brain fog while being treated for hypothyroidism were included in the analysis. Of these, 2409 (46.6%) participants reported symptom onset prior to the diagnosis of hypothyroidism, and 4096 (79.2%) participants experienced brain fog symptoms frequently. Of the symptoms listed, participants associated fatigue and forgetfulness most frequently with brain fog. More rest was the most common factor provided for improving symptoms. The textual data analysis identified areas of concern that are not often included in thyroid-specific quality of life questionnaires, including a focus on the diagnosis of hypothyroidism, the types and doses of medications, and the patient-doctor relationship. CONCLUSION: Brain fog in patients treated for hypothyroidism was associated most frequently with fatigue and cognitive symptoms. Several additional areas of patient concern were found to be associated with brain fog, which are not typically addressed in thyroid-specific questionnaires.

The Productivity Requirements of Implementing a Medical Scribe Program.

BACKGROUND: Economic analyses of medical scribes have been limited to individual, specialty-specific clinics. OBJECTIVE: To determine the number of additional patient visits various specialties would need to recover the costs of implementing scribes in their practice at 1 year. DESIGN: Modeling study based on 2015 data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Scribe costs were based on literature review and a third-party contractor model. Revenue was calculated from direct visit billing, CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) billing, and data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. DATA SOURCES: 2015 data from CMS and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. TARGET POPULATION: Health care providers. TIME HORIZON: 1 year. PERSPECTIVE: Office-based clinic. OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of additional patient visits a physician must have to recover the costs of a scribe program at 1 year. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: An average of 1.34 additional new patient visits per day (295 per year) were required to recover scribe costs (range, 0.89 [cardiology] to 1.80 [orthopedic surgery] new patient visits per day). For returning patients, an average of 2.15 additional visits per day (472 per year) were required (range, 1.65 [cardiology] to 2.78 [orthopedic surgery] returning visits per day). The addition of 2 new patient (or 3 returning) visits per day was profitable for all specialties. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results were not sensitive to most inputs, with the exception of hourly scribe cost and inclusion of CPT revenue. LIMITATION: Use of Medicare data and failure to account for indirect costs, downstream revenue, or changes in documentation quality. CONCLUSION: For all specialties, modest increases in productivity due to scribes may allow physicians to see more patients and offset scribe costs, making scribe programs revenue-neutral. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: University of Chicago Medicine's Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation and the Bucksbaum Institute.

The legacy effect in diabetes: are there long-term benefits?

In this narrative review, we summarise the evidence for and against the glycaemic legacy effect from the long-term follow-up of major diabetes trials and observational cohort studies. We provide a summary of the pathophysiological basis for the legacy effect and discuss some translational research. Results from trials of early diabetes and observational cohort studies suggest that a long-term effect of early glycaemic control exists; however, long-term follow-up from trials in participants with established diabetes is not supportive. Additionally, findings for the legacy effect are more conclusive for microvascular complications than macrovascular events. Overall, these results suggest that the glycaemic legacy effect is a long-term benefit (or risk) conferred to individuals in the early stages of diabetes and which is muted over time as individuals' vasculature changes and they develop complications from diabetes.