Indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosing, monitoring, and prescribing in people with diabetes and strategies for diabetes service recovery internationally.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused major disruptions in clinical services for people with chronic long-term conditions. In this narrative review, we assess the indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes services globally and the resulting adverse effects on rates of diagnosing, monitoring, and prescribing in people with type 2 diabetes. We summarise potential practical approaches that could address these issues and improve clinical services and outcomes for people living with diabetes during the recovery phase of the pandemic.

Prediabetes, participation in the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme, and associations with COVID-19-related mortality: A whole population study.

AIMS: To assess the effects of non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH, also known as pre-diabetes), including the impact of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP), on COVID-19-related mortality during the pandemic. METHODS: This study included all 61,438,225 individuals registered with General Practices in England and alive on 1st March 2020. We assessed COVID-19-related mortality in the 2,290,280(3.7 %) individuals with diagnosed NDH between March 2020 and February 2022 compared to those without diagnosed NDH or diabetes using Cox regression to adjust for demographic factors and cardiovascular comorbidities. Individuals with diagnosed NDH were further sub-categorised based on their contact with the NHS DPP (N = 376,590). Analyses were stratified by age (years) (<50, 50-69 and ≥ 70). RESULTS: There were 158,070 COVID-19 deaths; 17,280(11 %) for people with diagnosed NDH. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 0.95(0.93-0.96),p < 0.001 for those with diagnosed NDH compared to those without diagnosed diabetes or NDH. By age (years), HRs were, 2.53(2.23-2.88),p < 0.001 for < 50, 1.29(1.24-1.35),p < 0.001 for 50-69 and 0.87(0.85-0.89),p < 0.001 for ≥ 70. NHS DPP attendance was associated with lower COVID-19 mortality with a dose-response relationship with engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Younger people with diagnosed NDH were at higher relative risk of COVID-19 mortality. Attendance at the NHS DPP was associated with significantly lower COVID-19-related mortality.

Early outcomes of referrals to the English National Health Service Digital Weight Management Programme.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess participant weight change for the English National Health Service (NHS) Digital Weight Management Programme, the first such digital intervention to achieve population coverage. METHODS: A service evaluation was used to assess intervention effectiveness for adults with obesity and a diagnosis of hypertension and/or diabetes, between April 2021 and March 2022, using prospectively collected, national service-level data in England. RESULTS: Of the 63,937 referrals made from general practices, within the time period, 31,861 (50%) chose to take up the 12-week Programme. There were 31,718 participants who had time to finish the Programme; of those, 14,268 completed the Programme (defined as attending ≥60%), a 45% completion rate. The mean weight change for those who had time to finish the Programme was -2.2 kg (95% CI: -2.25 to -2.16), for those who completed it was -3.9 kg (95% CI: -3.99 to -3.84), and for those who had time to finish the Programme but did not complete it was -0.74 kg (95% CI: -0.79 to -0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The NHS Digital Weight Management Programme is effective at achieving clinically meaningful weight loss. The outcomes compare favorably to web-based weight management interventions tested in randomized trials and those delivered as face-to-face interventions, and results suggest that the approach may, with increased participation, bring population-level benefits.

Can the introduction of a 12-lead ECG help reduce mortality in those presenting with foot ulceration to multidisciplinary diabetic foot clinics? An observational evaluation of a real-world implementation pilot in England.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The risk of dying within 2 years of presentation with diabetic foot ulceration is over six times the risk of amputation, with CVD the major contributor. Using an observational evaluation of a real-world implementation pilot, we aimed to assess whether for those presenting with diabetic foot ulceration in England, introducing a 12-lead ECG into routine care followed by appropriate clinical action was associated with reduced mortality. METHODS: Between July 2014 and December 2017, ten multidisciplinary diabetic foot services in England participated in a pilot project introducing 12-lead ECGs for new attendees with foot ulceration. Inception coincided with launch of the National Diabetes Footcare Audit (NDFA), whereby all diabetic footcare services in England were invited to enter data on new attendees with foot ulceration. Poisson regression models assessed the mortality RR at 2 and 5 years following first assessment of those receiving care in a participating pilot unit vs those receiving care in any other unit in England, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, type and duration of diabetes, ulcer severity, and morbidity in the year prior to first assessment. RESULTS: Of the 3110 people recorded in the NDFA at a participating unit during the pilot, 33% (1015) were recorded as having received an ECG. A further 25,195 people recorded in the NDFA had attended another English footcare service. Unadjusted mortality in the pilot units was 16.3% (165) at 2 years and 37.4% (380) at 5 years for those who received an ECG, and 20.5% (430) and 45.2% (950), respectively, for those who did not receive an ECG. For people included in the NDFA at other units, unadjusted mortality was 20.1% (5075) and 42.6% (10,745), respectively. In the fully adjusted model, mortality was not significantly lower for those attending participating units at 2 (RR 0.93 [95% CI 0.85, 1.01]) or 5 years (RR 0.95 [95% CI 0.90, 1.01]). At participating units, mortality in those who received an ECG vs those who did not was lower at 5 years (RR 0.86 [95% CI 0.76, 0.97]), but not at 2 years (RR 0.87 [95% CI 0.72, 1.04]). Comparing just those that received an ECG with attendees at all other centres in England, mortality was lower at 5 years (RR 0.87 [95% CI 0.78, 0.96]), but not at 2 years (RR 0.86 [95% CI 0.74, 1.01]). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The evaluation confirms the high mortality seen in those presenting with diabetic foot ulceration. Overall mortality at the participating units was not significantly reduced at 2 or 5 years, with confidence intervals just crossing parity. Implementation of the 12-lead ECG into the routine care pathway proved challenging for clinical teams-overall a third of attendees had one, although some units delivered the intervention to over 60% of attendees-and the evaluation was therefore underpowered. Nonetheless, the signals of potential mortality benefit among those who had an ECG suggest that units in a position to operationalise implementation may wish to consider this. DATA AVAILABILITY: Data from the National Diabetes Audit can be requested through the National Health Service Digital Data Access Request Service process at: https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/dars-products-and-services/data-set-catalogue/national-diabetes-audit-nda.

Non-pharmacological interventions to improve cardiovascular risk factors in people with diabetic foot disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in those with diabetic foot disease is very high. Non-pharmacological interventions may improve this risk, though no previous evidence synthesis has been completed. This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of non-pharmacological interventions on CVD risk factors in diabetic ulcer disease. Multiple databases and trials registers were searched from inception to December 6th 2023. We included reports of randomised controlled trials investigating the impact of non-pharmacological interventions on cardiovascular risk in those with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and current or previous diabetic foot disease. Twenty studies were included. Extracted data included: study design and setting; participant sociodemographic factors; and change in cardiovascular risk factors. Data were synthesised using random effects meta-analyses and narrative syntheses. Interventions included nutritional supplementation, collaborative care, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, patient education, nurse-led intervention, self-management, family support, relaxation and exercise, over a median duration of 12 weeks. Significant post-intervention changes were observed in fasting plasma glucose, serum insulin levels, insulin sensitivity and resistance, glycated haemoglobin, triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and C-reactive protein. No effects were detected in very low- or high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol or body mass index. Non-pharmacological interventions show promise in improving CVD risk in diabetic foot disease.

Weight trends amongst adults with diabetes or hypertension during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study using OpenSAFELY.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic restrictions may have influenced behaviours related to weight. AIMS: To describe patterns of weight change amongst adults living in England with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) and/or hypertension during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design and Setting With the approval of NHS England, we conducted an observational cohort study using the routinely collected health data of approximately 40% of adults living in England, accessed through the OpenSAFELY service inside TPP. METHOD: We investigated clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with rapid weight gain (>0·5kg/m2/year) using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We extracted data on adults with T2D (n=1,231,455, 44% female, 76% white British) or hypertension (n=3,558,405, 50% female, 84% white British). Adults with T2D lost weight overall (median δ = -0.1kg/m2/year [IQR: -0.7, 0.4]), however, rapid weight gain was common (20.7%) and associated with sex (male vs female: aOR 0.78[95%CI 0.77, 0.79]); age, older age reduced odds (e.g. 60-69-year-olds vs 18-29-year-olds: aOR 0.66[0.61, 0.71]); deprivation, (least-deprived-IMD vs most-deprived-IMD: aOR 0.87[0.85, 0.89]); white ethnicity (Black vs White: aOR 0.95[0.92, 0.98]); mental health conditions (e.g. depression: aOR 1.13 [1.12, 1.15]); and diabetes treatment (non-insulin treatment vs no pharmacological treatment: aOR 0.68[0.67, 0.69]). Adults with hypertension maintained stable weight overall (median δ = 0.0kg/m2/year [ -0.6, 0.5]), however, rapid weight gain was common (24.7%) and associated with similar characteristics as in T2D. CONCLUSION: Amongst adults living in England with T2D and/or hypertension, rapid pandemic weight gain was more common amongst females, younger adults, those living in more deprived areas, and those with mental health condition.

The effectiveness of digital delivery versus group-based face-to-face delivery of the English National Health Service Type 2 Diabetes Prevention Programme: a non-inferiority retrospective cohort comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Face-to-face group-based diabetes prevention programmes have been shown to be effective in many settings. Digital delivery may suit some patients, but research comparing the effectiveness of digital with face-to-face delivery is scarce. The aim was to assess if digital delivery of the English National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) is non-inferior to group-based face-to-face delivery in terms of weight change, and evaluate factors associated with differential change. METHODS: The study included those recruited to the NHS DPP in 2017-2018. Individual-level data from a face-to-face cohort was compared to two cohorts on a digital pilot who (i) were offered no choice of delivery mode, or (ii) chose digital over face-to-face. Changes in weight at 6 and 12 months were analysed using mixed effects linear regression, having matched participants from the digital pilot to similar participants from face-to-face. RESULTS: Weight change on the digital pilot was non-inferior to face-to-face at both time points: it was similar in the comparison of those with no choice (difference in weight change: -0.284 kg [95% CI: -0.712, 0.144] at 6 months) and greater in digital when participants were offered a choice (-1.165 kg [95% CI: -1.841, -0.489]). Interactions between delivery mode and sex, ethnicity, age and deprivation were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Digital delivery of the NHS DPP achieved weight loss at least as good as face-to-face. Patients who were offered a choice and opted for digital experienced better weight loss, compared to patients offered face-to-face only.

Diabetes and Multiple Long-term Conditions: A Review of Our Current Global Health Challenge.

Use of effective treatments and management programs is leading to longer survival of people with diabetes. This, in combination with obesity, is thus contributing to a rise in people living with more than one condition, known as multiple long-term conditions (MLTC or multimorbidity). MLTC is defined as the presence of two or more long-term conditions, with possible combinations of physical, infectious, or mental health conditions, where no one condition is considered as the index. These include a range of conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer, chronic kidney disease, arthritis, depression, dementia, and severe mental health illnesses. MLTC has major implications for the individual such as poor quality of life, worse health outcomes, fragmented care, polypharmacy, poor treatment adherence, mortality, and a significant impact on health care services. MLTC is a challenge, where interventions for prevention and management are lacking a robust evidence base. The key research directions for diabetes and MLTC from a global perspective include system delivery and care coordination, lifestyle interventions and therapeutic interventions.

Prevalence of multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity) in England: a whole population study of over 60 million people.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTC) at whole English population level, stratifying by age, sex, socioeconomic status and ethnicity. DESIGN: A whole population study. SETTING: Individuals registered with a general practice in England and alive on 31 March 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 60,004,883 individuals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MLTC prevalence, defined as two or more of 35 conditions derived from a number of national patient-level datasets. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the independent associations of age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation decile with odds of MLTC. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of MLTC was 14.8% (8,878,231), varying from 0.9% (125,159) in those aged 0-19 years to 68.2% (1,905,979) in those aged 80 years and over. In multivariable regression analyses, compared with the 50-59 reference group, the odds ratio was 0.04 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.04-0.04; p < 0.001) for those aged 0-19 years and 10.21 (10.18-10.24; p < 0.001) for those aged 80 years and over. Odds were higher for men compared with women, 1.02 (1.02-1.02; p < 0.001), for the most deprived decile compared with the least deprived, 2.26 (2.25-2.27; p < 0.001), and for Asian ethnicity compared with those of white ethnicity, 1.05 (1.04-1.05; p < 0.001). Odds were lower for black, mixed and other ethnicities (0.94 (0.94-0.95) p < 0.001, 0.87 (0.87-0.88) p < 0.001 and 0.57 (0.56-0.57) p < 0.001, respectively). MLTC for persons aged 0-19 years were dominated by asthma, autism and epilepsy, for persons aged 20-49 years by depression and asthma, for persons aged 50-59 years by hypertension and depression and for those aged 60 years and older, by cardiometabolic factors and osteoarthritis. There were large numbers of combinations of conditions in each age group ranging from 5936 in those aged 0-19 years to 205,534 in those aged 80 years and over. CONCLUSIONS: While this study provides useful insight into the burden across the English population to assist health service delivery planning, the heterogeneity of MLTC presents challenges for delivery optimisation.

Association between the month of starting a weight management program and weight change in people at high risk of type 2 diabetes: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Weight loss is one of the most common New Year's resolutions, but it is unclear whether attempting to lose weight in January is more successful than attempting it at other times of the year. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study from the English National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Program, adults with nondiabetic hyperglycemia were enrolled in a structured behavioral weight management program. Repeated measures models assessed the mean difference between baseline and follow-up weight adjusting for monthly variation in weight among those with ≥1 weight measurement. RESULTS: Among 85,514 participants with a mean baseline BMI of 30.3 kg/m2 (range: 13.4 to 84.2), mean weight change at the end of the program after an average 7.9 (SD: 4.5) sessions over 6.4 (SD: 5.6) months was -2.00 kg (95% CI: -2.02 to -1.97 kg) or -2.33% (95% CI: -2.35% to -2.32%). Compared with participants starting in January, participants starting in other months lost less weight, ranging between 0.28 kg (95% CI: 0.10 to 0.45 kg) less weight in those starting in March and 0.71 kg (95% CI: 0.55 to 0.87 kg) less weight in those starting in November. April and May were the only exceptions, in which the estimates followed the same direction but were not statistically significant. Higher session attendance mediated the effects, with participants starting in January attending, on average, 0.2 to 0.7 more sessions than those starting in other months. CONCLUSIONS: People starting a weight management program in January lost 12% to 30% more weight than people starting it at other times of the year.

Twenty-year trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors among people with type 2 diabetes by dementia status in England: a retrospective cohort study.

To assess 20-year retrospective trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors preceding dementia diagnosis among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We identified 227,145 people with T2D aged > 42 years between 1999 and 2018. Annual mean levels of eight routinely measured cardio-metabolic factors were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Multivariable multilevel piecewise and non-piecewise growth curve models assessed retrospective trajectories of cardio-metabolic factors by dementia status from up to 19 years preceding dementia diagnosis (dementia) or last contact with healthcare (no dementia). 23,546 patients developed dementia; mean (SD) follow-up was 10.0 (5.8) years. In the dementia group, mean systolic blood pressure increased 16-19 years before dementia diagnosis compared with patients without dementia, but declined more steeply from 16 years before diagnosis, while diastolic blood pressure generally declined at similar rates. Mean body mass index followed a steeper non-linear decline from 11 years before diagnosis in the dementia group. Mean blood lipid levels (total cholesterol, LDL, HDL) and glycaemic measures (fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c) were generally higher in the dementia group compared with those without dementia and followed similar patterns of change. However, absolute group differences were small. Differences in levels of cardio-metabolic factors were observed up to two decades prior to dementia diagnosis. Our findings suggest that a long follow-up is crucial to minimise reverse causation arising from changes in cardio-metabolic factors during preclinical dementia. Future investigations which address associations between cardiometabolic factors and dementia should account for potential non-linear relationships and consider the timeframe when measurements are taken.

Comparison of weight change between face-to-face and digital delivery of the English National Health service diabetes prevention programme: An exploratory non-inferiority study with imputation of plausible weight outcomes.

Worldwide evidence suggests face-to-face diabetes prevention programmes are effective in preventing and delaying the onset of type 2 diabetes by encouraging behaviour change towards weight loss, healthy eating, and increased exercise. There is an absence of evidence on whether digital delivery is as effective as face-to-face. During 2017-18 patients in England were offered the National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme as group-based face-to-face delivery, digital delivery ('digital-only') or a choice between digital and face-to-face ('digital-choice'). The contemporaneous delivery allowed for a robust non-inferiority study, comparing face-to-face with digital only and digital choice cohorts. Changes in weight at 6 months were missing for around half of participants. Here we take a novel approach, estimating the average effect in all 65,741 individuals who enrolled in the programme, by making a range of plausible assumptions about weight change in individuals who did not provide outcome data. The benefit of this approach is that it includes everyone who enrolled in the programme, not restricted to those who completed. We analysed the data using multiple linear regression models. Under all scenarios explored, enrolment in the digital diabetes prevention programme was associated with clinically significant reductions in weight which were at least equivalent to weight loss in the face-to-face programme. Digital services can be just as effective as face-to-face in delivering a population-based approach to the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Imputation of plausible outcomes is a feasible methodological approach, suitable for analysis of routine data in settings where outcomes are missing for non-attenders.

Comparative Incidence of Diabetes Following Hospital Admission for COVID-19 and Pneumonia: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of diabetes may be elevated following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is unclear whether this is specific to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, associated with shared risk factors for severe COVID-19 and diabetes, and/or a generic risk following illness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: People admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 and/or pneumonia between 1 April 2020 and 31 August 2020 in England were linked with the National Diabetes Audit to identify incident diabetes after discharge up to 31 March 2021. Comparator cohorts admitted with pneumonia over the same dates in 2017, 2018, and 2019 were followed until 31 March 2018, 31 March 2019, and 31 March 2020, respectively. Poisson regression models were used to calculate adjusted diabetes incidence rates. RESULTS: Using the cohort of people discharged from the hospital following a diagnosis of COVID-19 without pneumonia in 2020 as the standard population (incidence rate 16.4 [95% CI 12.8-20.7] per 1,000 person-years), adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, and deprivation, gave incidence rates of 19.0 (95% CI 13.8-25.6) and 16.6 (95% CI 13.3-20.4) per 1,000 person-years for those admitted for COVID-19 with pneumonia and pneumonia without COVID-19, respectively, in 2020. These rates are not significantly different from those found after hospital admission for pneumonia in 2019, 2018, and 2017, at 13.7 (95% CI 10.8-17.3), 13.8 (95% CI 10.9-17.4), and 14.2 (95% CI 10.9-18.3) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support a clear impact of COVID-19 on the incidence of diabetes compared with risks in several comparator groups, including contemporaneously assessed risks in people hospitalized with pneumonia.

Addressing health inequalities in diabetes through research: Recommendations from Diabetes UK's 2022 health inequalities in diabetes workshop.

AIMS: To develop a position statement which identifies research priorities to address health inequalities in diabetes and provides recommendations to researchers and research funders on how best to conduct research in these areas. METHODS: A two-day research workshop was conducted bringing together research experts in diabetes, research experts in health inequalities, healthcare professionals and people living with diabetes. RESULTS: The following key areas were identified as needing increased focus: How can we improve patient and public involvement and engagement to make diabetes research more inclusive of and relevant to diverse communities? How can we improve research design so that the people who could benefit most are represented? How can we use theories from implementation science to facilitate the uptake of research findings into routine practice to reach the populations with highest need? How can we collate and evaluate local innovation projects and disseminate best practice around tackling health inequalities in diabetes? How can we best collect and use data to address health inequalities in diabetes, including the harnessing of real-world and routinely collected data? How could research funders allocate funds to best address health inequalities in diabetes? How do we ensure the research community is representative of the general population? CONCLUSIONS: This position statement outlines recommendations to address the urgent need to tackle health inequalities in diabetes through research and calls on the diabetes research community to act upon these recommendations to ensure future research works to eliminate unfair and avoidable disparities in health.

Effectiveness of digital and remote provision of the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: To assess weight change in the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) delivered via video conferencing (remote) sessions or delivered via specific digital interventions through apps or websites, during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to group-based face-to-face interventions, pre-pandemic. METHODS: Prospectively collected national service-level data relating to individuals with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0%-6.4%) or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) referred to the NHS DPP from June 2016 to March 2022. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and March 2022, 335,961 people were referred to the programme and were offered a choice of remote or digital intervention. This was preceded by 556,793 people referred to the face-to-face programme between June 2016 and February 2022. Uptakes to intervention sessions were 47% for those offered a choice and 39% for face-to-face. Remote and digital participants were significantly younger (60 and 56 vs. 65 years) and heavier (86.1 kg and 91.0 kg vs. 84.1 kg) compared to face-to-face. Weight change was assessed for 42,407 remote, 7699 digital and 97,205 face-to-face participants with sufficient time to have finished the programme and no missing data. Mean weight losses for participants attending at least one intervention session were: 2.40 (2.36-2.44) kg, 2.59 (2.49-2.68) kg and 2.01 (1.98-2.04) kg for remote, digital and face-to-face participants respectively. Corresponding mean weight losses for those who completed the programme were: 3.24 (3.19-3.30) kg, 4.76 (4.60-4.92) kg and 3.04 (3.00-3.07) kg. There were no significant differences in weight change between interventions by ethnicity and deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: Weight losses achieved through remote and digital interventions were greater than those previously achieved through face-to-face interventions, without evidence of exacerbation of health inequalities.

Care processes in people in remission from type 2 diabetes: A cohort study using the National Diabetes Audit.

AIMS: People with type 2 diabetes can enter remission but may relapse or develop legacy complications. This analysis assesses whether people with remission from type 2 diabetes continue receiving annual care processes recommended in national guidelines and the potential impacts of formal recognition of remission. METHODS: People with type 2 diabetes with and without formal recognition (diagnostic code) of remission, and with and without evidence of remission (HbA1c < 48 mmol/mol without prescription for glucose-lowering drugs in preceding 26 weeks), included in the 2018/19 National Diabetes Audit (NDA) for England and Wales were followed up to identify care processes received between 1 January 2019 and 31 March 2020. RESULTS: Of the 2,822,145 people with type 2 diabetes in the cohort, 16,460 (0.58%) were coded with remission in the 2018/19 NDA. After adjustment for age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity, people coded with remission were less likely to receive each care process than those without such coding irrespective of HbA1c measurements (relative risk (RR) of receiving all 8 care processes 0.70 (95% CI 0.69-0.72)). For the 339,235 people with evidence of remission, irrespective of diagnostic coding compared to those without such evidence, the RR for receiving all 8 care processes was 0.94 (95% CI 0.93-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: People coded with remission of type 2 diabetes were less likely to receive diabetes care processes than those without such coding. People with evidence of remission had only a slightly reduced likelihood of receiving care processes. Formal recognition of remission may affect the provision or uptake of care processes.