Ageing well with diabetes: the role of technology.

Over the past two decades there has been a substantial rise in the adoption of diabetes therapeutic technology among children, adolescents and younger adults with type 1 diabetes, and its use is now also advocated for older individuals. Older people with diabetes are more prone to experience hypoglycaemia because of numerous predisposing factors and are at higher risk of hypoglycaemic events requiring third-party assistance as well as other adverse sequelae. Hypoglycaemia may also have long-term consequences, including cognitive impairment, frailty and disability. Diabetes in older people is often characterised by marked glucose variability related to age-associated changes such as variable appetite and levels of physical activity, comorbidities and polypharmacotherapy. Preventing hypoglycaemia and mitigating glucose excursions may have considerable positive impacts on physical and cognitive function and general well-being and may even prevent or improve frailty. Technology for older people includes continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps, automated insulin delivery systems and smart insulin pens. Clinical trials and real-world studies have shown that older people with diabetes benefit from technology in terms of glucose management, reductions in hypoglycaemic events, emergency department attendance and hospital admissions, and improvement in quality of life. However, ageing may bring physical impairments and other challenges that hinder the use of technology. Healthcare professionals should identify older adults with diabetes who may benefit from therapeutic technology and then adopt an individualised approach to education and follow-up for individuals and their caregivers. Future research should explore the impact of diabetes technology on outcomes relevant to older people with diabetes.

Amino Acid Profiles in Older Adults with Frailty: Secondary Analysis from MetaboFrail and BIOSPHERE Studies.

An altered amino acid metabolism has been described in frail older adults which may contribute to muscle loss and functional decline associated with frailty. In the present investigation, we compared circulating amino acid profiles of older adults with physical frailty and sarcopenia (PF&S, n = 94), frail/pre-frail older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (F-T2DM, n = 66), and robust non-diabetic controls (n = 40). Partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) models were built to define the amino acid signatures associated with the different frailty phenotypes. PLS-DA allowed correct classification of participants with 78.2 ± 1.9% accuracy. Older adults with F-T2DM showed an amino acid profile characterized by higher levels of 3-methylhistidine, alanine, arginine, ethanolamine, and glutamic acid. PF&S and control participants were discriminated based on serum concentrations of aminoadipic acid, aspartate, citrulline, cystine, taurine, and tryptophan. These findings suggest that different types of frailty may be characterized by distinct metabolic perturbations. Amino acid profiling may therefore serve as a valuable tool for frailty biomarker discovery.

The ability of eight frailty instruments to identify adverse outcomes across different settings: the FRAILTOOLS project.

BACKGROUND: To compare the performance of eight frailty instruments to identify relevant adverse outcomes for older people across different settings over a 12 month follow-up. METHODS: Observational longitudinal prospective study of people aged 75 + years enrolled in different settings (acute geriatric wards, geriatric clinic, primary care clinics, and nursing homes) across five European cities. Frailty was assessed using the following: Frailty Phenotype, SHARE-FI, 5-item Frailty Trait Scale (FTS-5), 3-item FTS (FTS-3), FRAIL scale, 35-item Frailty Index (FI-35), Gérontopôle Frailty Screening Tool, and Clinical Frailty Scale. Adverse outcomes ascertained at follow-up were as follows: falls, hospitalization, increase in limitation in basic (BADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), and mortality. Sensitivity, specificity, and capacity to predict adverse outcomes in logistic regressions by each instrument above age, gender, and multimorbidity were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 996 individuals were followed (mean age 82.2 SD 5.5 years, 61.3% female). In geriatric wards, the FI-35 (69.1%) and the FTS-5 (67.9%) showed good sensitivity to predict death and good specificity to predict BADL worsening (70.3% and 69.8%, respectively). The FI-35 also showed good sensitivity to predict BADL worsening (74.6%). In nursing homes, the FI-35 and the FTSs predicted mortality and BADL worsening with a sensitivity > 73.9%. In geriatric clinic, the FI-35, the FTS-5, and the FRAIL scale obtained specificities > 85% to predict BADL worsening. No instrument achieved high enough sensitivity nor specificity in primary care. All the instruments predict the risk for all the outcomes in the whole sample after adjusting for age, gender, and multimorbidity. The associations of these instruments that remained significant by setting were for BADL worsening in geriatric wards [FI-35 OR = 5.94 (2.69-13.14), FTS-3 = 3.87 (1.76-8.48)], nursing homes [FI-35 = 4.88 (1.54-15.44), FTS-5 = 3.20 (1.61-6.38), FTS-3 = 2.31 (1.27-4.21), FRAIL scale = 1.91 (1.05-3.48)], and geriatric clinic [FRAIL scale = 4.48 (1.73-11.58), FI-35 = 3.30 (1.55-7.00)]; for IADL worsening in primary care [FTS-5 = 3.99 (1.14-13.89)] and geriatric clinic [FI-35 = 3.42 (1.56-7.49), FRAIL scale = 3.27 (1.21-8.86)]; for hospitalizations in primary care [FI-35 = 3.04 (1.25-7.39)]; and for falls in geriatric clinic [FI-35 = 2.21 (1.01-4.84)]. CONCLUSIONS: No single assessment instrument performs the best for all settings and outcomes. While in inpatients several commonly used frailty instruments showed good sensitivities (mainly for mortality and BADL worsening) but usually poor specificities, the contrary happened in geriatric clinic. None of the instruments showed a good performance in primary care. The FI-35 and the FTS-5 showed the best profile among the instruments assessed.

Effectiveness of a multimodal intervention in functionally impaired older people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes, a highly prevalent chronic disease, is associated with increasing frailty and functional decline in older people. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a multimodal intervention on functional performance in frail and pre-frail participants aged ≥70 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: The MID-Frail study was a cluster-randomized multicenter clinical trial conducted in 74 trial sites across seven European countries. The trial recruited 964 participants who were aged >70 years [mean age in intervention group, 78.4 (SD 5.6) years, 49.2% male and 77.6 (SD 5.29) years, 52.4% male in usual care group], with type diabetes mellitus and determined to be frail or pre-frail using Fried's frailty phenotype. Participants were allocated by trial site to follow either usual care (UCG) or intervention procedures (IG). Intervention group participants received a multimodal intervention composed of (i) an individualized and progressive resistance exercise programme for 16 weeks; (ii) a structured diabetes and nutritional educational programme over seven sessions; and (iii) Investigator-linked training to ensure optimal diabetes care. Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) scores were used to assess change in functional performance at 12 months between the groups. An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the intervention was undertaken using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Secondary outcomes included mortality, hospitalization, institutionalization, quality of life, burden on caregivers, the frequency and severity of hypoglycaemia episodes, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. RESULTS: After 12 months, IG participants had mean SPPB scores 0.85 points higher than those in the UCG (95% CI, 0.44 to 1.26, P < 0.0001). Dropouts were higher in frail participants and in the intervention group, but significant differences in SPPB between treatment groups remained consistent after sensitivity analysis. Estimates suggest a mean saving following intervention of 428.02 EUR (2016) per patient per year, with ICER analysis indicating a consistent benefit of the described health care intervention over usual care. No statistically significant differences between groups were detected in any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that a 12 month structured multimodal intervention programme across several clinical settings in different European countries leads to a clinically relevant and cost-effective improvement in the functional status of older frail and pre-frail participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Treatment of Diabetes in Older Adults: An Endocrine Society* Clinical Practice Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to formulate clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of diabetes in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, particularly type 2, is becoming more prevalent in the general population, especially in individuals over the age of 65 years. The underlying pathophysiology of the disease in these patients is exacerbated by the direct effects of aging on metabolic regulation. Similarly, aging effects interact with diabetes to accelerate the progression of many common diabetes complications. Each section in this guideline covers all aspects of the etiology and available evidence, primarily from controlled trials, on therapeutic options and outcomes in this population. The goal is to give guidance to practicing health care providers that will benefit patients with diabetes (both type 1 and type 2), paying particular attention to avoiding unnecessary and/or harmful adverse effects.

Diabetes, Nutrition, and Exercise.

Aging is associated with body composition changes that lead to glucose intolerance and increased risk of diabetes. The incidence of diabetes increases with aging, and the prevalence has increased because of the increased life expectancy of the population. Lifestyle modifications through nutrition and exercise in combination with medications are the main components of diabetes management. The potential benefits of nutrition and exercise intervention in older people with diabetes are enormous. Nutrition and exercise training are feasible even in frail older people living in care homes and should take into consideration individual circumstances, cultural factors, and ethnic preferences.

Reasons given by general practitioners for non-treatment decisions in younger and older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Kingdom: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus are less likely to receive antihyperglycaemic therapy compared to their younger counterparts. The purpose of this study was to assess the reasons of general practitioners (GPs) for not treating younger and older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus with antihyperglycaemic agents. METHODS: In a survey conducted between November 2009 and January 2010, 358 GPs from the United Kingdom selected reasons for not initiating antihyperglycaemic therapy in younger (< 65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and untreated with any antihyperglycaemic agent for at least six months following diagnosis. Thirty-six potential reasons were classified into four major categories: Mild hyperglycaemia, Factors related to antihyperglycaemic agents, Comorbidities and polypharmacy, and Patient-related reasons. Reasons for non-treatment were compared between younger (n = 1, 023) and older (n = 1, 005) patients. RESULTS: Non-treatment reasons related to Mild hyperglycaemia were selected more often by GPs for both younger (88%) and older (86%) patients than those in other categories. For older patients, Factors related to antihyperglycaemic agents (46% vs. 38%) and Comorbidities and polypharmacy (33% vs. 19%), both including safety-related issues, were selected significantly (p < 0.001) more often by GPs. No between-group difference was observed for the Patient-related reasons category. The GP-reported HbA1c threshold for initiating antihyperglycaemic therapy was significantly (p < 0.001) lower for younger patients (mean ± standard deviation: 7.3% ± 0.7) compared to older patients (7.5% ± 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: GPs selected reasons related to Mild hyperglycaemia for non-treatment of their untreated patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus, despite nearly one-third of these patients having their most recent HbA1c value ≥7%. The findings further suggest that safety-related issues may influence the non-treatment of older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Hypoglycaemia in residential care homes.

Hypoglycaemia is the most common metabolic complication occurring in older people with type 2 diabetes. Limited data are available about prevalence of diabetes or its complications in care homes. However, the prevalence of residents with diabetes in care homes seems to be significant. There is high level of disability, dependency, and polypharmacy among residents in these settings. Hypoglycaemia is both an important adverse reaction of treatment and an outcome measure. This study reviews the relevant literature and reports a case of hypoglycaemia to demonstrate the causes of hypoglycaemia, characteristics of these patients, and the complexity of their problems.

Impact of diabetes on physical function in older people.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the nature of functional impairment in older people with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A population-based case-control study with detailed assessment of diabetes and functional status was undertaken. RESULTS: Altogether, 403 case subjects and 403 matched control subjects were studied (median age 75 years, 51% female). Subjects with diabetes had more comorbidities than control subjects (mean 2.5 vs. 1.9, P < 0.0001) and were more likely to have severe functional impairment (4 vs. 1%, Barthel score <5, P < 0.001). Health status pertaining to physical function was reduced in case subjects (SF36 60 vs. 40, P < 0.0001). In a multivariate model controlling for age, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, osteoarthritis, and dementia, diabetes remained significantly associated with mobility limitation (odds ratio 2.1, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Older people with diabetes have considerable functional impairment associated with reduced health status. This population may benefit from comprehensive geriatric assessment and tailored diabetes management.