Patterns of Prescribing Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors for Medicare Beneficiaries in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from large randomized clinical trials supports the benefit of SGLT2i (sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) to improve cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes with or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or chronic kidney disease. Considering this evidence, which has been expanding since the product label indication for empagliflozin to reduce risk of cardiovascular death in 2016, clinician-level variation in the prescription of SGLT2i among US Medicare beneficiaries was evaluated. METHODS: Antihyperglycemic medication prescribers were identified as those physicians and advanced practice providers prescribing metformin in Medicare part D prescriber data. In this cross-sectional study, the proportion prescribing SGLT2i was assessed overall and across specialties in 2018, with changes assessed from 2014 to 2018. SGLT2i use was compared with other second-line antihyperglycemic medication classes, sulfonylureas and DPP4is (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors). RESULTS: Among 232 523 unique clinicians who prescribed metformin for Medicare beneficiaries in 2018 (diabetes-treating clinicians), 45 255 (19.5%) prescribed SGLT2i. There was substantial variation across specialties-from 72% of endocrinologists to 14% of cardiologists who prescribed metformin also prescribed SGLT2i. Between 2014 and 2018, the number prescribing SGLT2i increased 5-fold from 9048 in 2014 to 45 255 in 2018. Among clinicians who prescribed both sulfonylureas and SGLT2i in 2018, SGLT2i was prescribed to a median 33 beneficiaries for every 100 prescribed sulfonylureas (interquartile range, 18-67). SGLT2i use relative to sulfonylureas increased from 19 (interquartile range, 11-34) per 100 in 2014 to 33 (interquartile range, 18-67) per 100 in 2018 (Ptrend<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Eighty percent of clinicians prescribing metformin to Medicare beneficiaries did not prescribe SGLT2i in 2018. Moreover, sulfonylureas prescriptions were 3 times more frequent than those of SGLT2is, although a pattern of increasing uptake may portend future trends. These findings highlight a baseline opportunity to improve care and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes.

Quality of Care of the Initial Patient Cohort of the Diabetes Collaborative Registry®.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines and performance measures exist for patients with diabetes mellitus, achievement of these metrics is not well known. The Diabetes Collaborative Registry® (DCR) was formed to understand the quality of diabetes mellitus care across the primary and specialty care continuum in the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the frequency of achievement of 7 diabetes mellitus-related quality metrics and variability across the Diabetes Collaborative Registry® sites. Among 574 972 patients with diabetes mellitus from 259 US practices, median (interquartile range) achievement of the quality metrics across the practices was the following: (1) glycemic control: 19% (5-47); (2) blood pressure control: 80% (67-88); (3) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers in patients with coronary artery disease: 62% (51-69); (4) nephropathy screening: 62% (53-71); (5) eye examination: 0.7% (0.0-79); (6) foot examination: 0.0% (0.0-2.3); and (7) tobacco screening/cessation counseling: 86% (80-94). In hierarchical, modified Poisson regression models, there was substantial variability in meeting these metrics across sites, particularly with documentation of glycemic control and eye and foot examinations. There was also notable variation across specialties, with endocrinology practices performing better on glycemic control and diabetes mellitus foot examinations and cardiology practices succeeding more in blood pressure control and use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers. CONCLUSIONS: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry® was established to document and improve the quality of outpatient diabetes mellitus care. While target achievement of some metrics of cardiovascular risk modification was high, achievement of others was suboptimal and highly variable. This may be attributable to fragmentation of care, lack of ownership among various specialists concerning certain domains of care, incomplete documentation, true gaps in care, or a combination of these factors.

Shifting Paradigms in the Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes: Reflections on Recent Cardiovascular Outcome Trials.

An important challenge in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes is cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. While it is well established that intensive glycemic control prevents the onset and slows the progression of certain microvascular complications, such a strategy utilized in multiple clinical trials over the past few decades has failed to show a similar benefit with regard to cardiovascular events, including mortality. Despite this, a major hope has been the discovery of glucose-lowering medications that simultaneously improve cardiovascular outcomes. Over the past year and a half, four randomized clinical trials (involving empagliflozin, pioglitazone, liraglutide, and semaglutide) have reported important benefits in preventing adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with or at risk for type 2 diabetes and established CVD. On the basis of these landmark trials, we propose that a paradigm shift in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes, specifically in those with prior macrovascular disease. A transition from current algorithms based primarily on hemoglobin A1c values to a more comprehensive strategy additionally focused on CVD prevention seems warranted.

PRIDE Statement on the Need for a Moratorium on the CMS Plan to Cite Hospitals for Performing Point-of-Care Capillary Blood Glucose Monitoring on Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVE: A writing committee of the Planning Research in Inpatient Diabetes (PRIDE) group has written this consensus article on behalf of the group in response to a specific request for input from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The purpose of this article is to respond to the March 13, 2015 statement from that agency regarding plans to enforce prohibition of the off-label use of point of care (POC) capillary blood glucose monitor (BGM) testing in most critically ill patients. The article discusses: 1) how POC BGM testing is currently regulated; 2) how POC BGM testing is currently used in the United States; and 3) how POC BGM testing can be safely and effectively regulated in the future through cooperation between the clinician, laboratory, regulatory, industry, and patient communities. PARTICIPANTS: Nine members of PRIDE volunteered to write the statement on behalf of the entire group. EVIDENCE: Descriptions of current medical practice for critically ill patients were derived from the experience of the authors. Descriptions of the performance of various methods for measuring glucose levels for intensive insulin therapy came from a literature review. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Eleven questions were developed by the PRIDE writing group. After extensive electronic and telephone discussion, the article was written and reviewed by all nine authors and then reviewed by two outside experts in the care of critically ill patients. All suggestions by the authors and the outside experts were incorporated. CONCLUSIONS: Although the CMS is attempting to protect patients with abnormal glycemic control from harm due to inaccurate POC fingerstick capillary BGM testing, their plan will result in more harm than good. A moratorium on enforcement of the prohibition of off-label use of POC capillary BGM testing is needed.

National trends in US hospital admissions for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia among Medicare beneficiaries, 1999 to 2011.

IMPORTANCE: The increasing intensity of diabetes mellitus management over the past decade may have resulted in lower rates of hyperglycemic emergencies but higher rates of hospital admissions for hypoglycemia among older adults. Trends in these hospitalizations and subsequent outcomes are not known. OBJECTIVE: To characterize changes in hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia hospitalization rates and subsequent mortality and readmission rates among older adults in the United States over a 12-year period, and to compare these results according to age, sex, and race. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective observational study using data from 33,952,331 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years or older from 1999 to 2011. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospitalization rates for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, 30-day and 1-year mortality rates, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: A total of 279,937 patients experienced 302,095 hospitalizations for hyperglycemia, and 404,467 patients experienced 429,850 hospitalizations for hypoglycemia between 1999 and 2011. During this time, rates of admissions for hyperglycemia declined by 38.6% (from 114 to 70 admissions per 100,000 person-years), while admissions for hypoglycemia increased by 11.7% (from 94 to 105 admissions per 100,000 person-years). In analyses designed to account for changing diabetes mellitus prevalence, admissions for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia declined by 55.2% and 9.5%, respectively. Trends were similar across age, sex, and racial subgroups, but hypoglycemia rates were 2-fold higher for older patients (≥75 years) when compared with younger patients (65-74 years), and admission rates for both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia were 4-fold higher for black patients compared with white patients. The 30-day and 1-year mortality and 30-day readmission rates improved during the study period and were similar after an index hospitalization for either hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia (5.4%, 17.1%, and 15.3%, respectively, after hyperglycemia hospitalizations in 2010; 4.4%, 19.9%, and 16.3% after hypoglycemia hospitalizations). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hospital admission rates for hypoglycemia now exceed those for hyperglycemia among older adults. Although admissions for hypoglycemia have declined modestly since 2007, rates among black Medicare beneficiaries and those older than 75 years remain high. Hospital admissions for severe hypoglycemia seem to pose a greater health threat than those for hyperglycemia, suggesting new opportunities for improvement in care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

Discontinuation of antihyperglycemic therapy after acute myocardial infarction: medical necessity or medical error?

BACKGROUND: A national Medicare database indicated that one in eight older patients with diabetes was discharged off all antihyperglycemic therapy (AHT) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This practice was associated with increased one-year mortality, but the reasons for stopping AHT were not known. A study was conducted to determine whether such practice might be due to medical necessity (that is, a new contraindication) or oversight--in which case a quality improvement opportunity might exist. METHODS: Some 327 diabetic patients were identified who were hospitalized with AMI during a one-year period at an academic medical center and an affiliated community hospital. Detailed chart reviews were conducted on the 217 patients with AMI as a principal diagnosis who were admitted on AHT (insulin, 81). Twenty-five patients (11.5%) were discharged off AHT, 24 (96%) of whom received some AHT in the hospital, mostly as insulin sliding scale. One patient's (4%) AHT was stopped because of a change in care goals, a second developed recurrent hypoglycemia, and a third had entirely normal in-hospital blood glucose after AHT discontinuation. The remaining 22 patients (88%) were categorized as being discharged off AHT without justification. The demographic/clinical characteristics of those discharged on versus off AHT were similar, except for better left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the latter. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of diabetic patients discharged off AHT following AMI was nearly identical to that in a national database (approximately one out of eight). No clear reason for this practice could be found in nearly 90% of the cases, suggesting that it may often constitute a medical error for a growing population of diabetic patients with ischemic heart disease.

Relationship between glycosylated hemoglobin assessment and glucose therapy intensification in patients with diabetes hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between A1C and glucose therapy intensification (GTI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A1C was measured as part of routine care (clinical A1C) or in the core laboratory (laboratory A1C, results unavailable to clinicians). GTI predictors were identified using hierarchical Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of 1,274 patients, 886 (70%) had clinical A1C and an additional 263 had laboratory A1C measured. Overall, A1C was <7% in 419 (37%), 7-9% in 415 (36%), and >9% in 315 patients (27%). GTI occurred in 31% of patients and was more frequent in those with clinical A1C both before (34 vs. 24%, P < 0.001) and after multivariable adjustment (relative risk 1.34 [95% CI 1.12-1.62] vs. no clinical A1C). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term glucose control is poor in most AMI patients with DM, but only a minority of patients undergo GTI at discharge. Inpatient A1C assessment is strongly associated with intensification of glucose-lowering therapy.

Individualizing glycemic targets in type 2 diabetes mellitus: implications of recent clinical trials.

One of the first steps in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is setting glycemic goals. Professional organizations advise setting specific hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) targets for patients, and individualization of these goals has more recently been emphasized. However, the operational meaning of glycemic goals, and specific methods for individualizing them, have not been well-described. Choosing a specific HbA(1c) target range for a given patient requires taking several factors into consideration, including an assessment of the patient's risk for hyperglycemia-related complications versus the risks of therapy, all in the context of the overall clinical setting. Comorbid conditions, psychological status, capacity for self-care, economic considerations, and family and social support systems also play a key role in the intensity of therapy. The individualization of HbA(1c) targets has gained more traction after recent clinical trials in older patients with established type 2 diabetes mellitus failed to show a benefit from intensive glucose-lowering therapy on cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. The limited available evidence suggests that near-normal glycemic targets should be the standard for younger patients with relatively recent onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus and little or no micro- or macrovascular complications, with the aim of preventing complications over the many years of life. However, somewhat higher targets should be considered for older patients with long-standing type 2 diabetes mellitus and evidence of CVD (or multiple CVD risk factors). This review explores these issues further and proposes a framework for considering an appropriate and safe HbA(1c) target range for each patient.

Discontinuation of antihyperglycemic therapy and clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in older patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes are frequently admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) on antihyperglycemic agents but may be discharged without glucose-lowering therapy. We examined the frequency of this practice and evaluated the associated outcomes of readmission and mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective study of 24 953 Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes discharged after hospitalization for AMI. We examined the frequency of discontinuation of antihyperglycemic agents on discharge among those patients admitted on a diabetic regimen. The independent association between discharge on versus off antihyperglycemic therapy and outcomes at 1 year was assessed in multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for patient, physician, and hospital variables. The primary outcome was time to death within 1 year of discharge; secondary outcomes were time to first rehospitalization within 1 year for AMI, heart failure, and all causes. There were 8751 patients admitted on at least 1 antihyperglycemic agent who met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of these, 7581 (86.6%) were discharged on antihyperglycemic therapy and 1170 (13.4%) were discharged off antihyperglycemic therapy. After multivariable analysis, as compared with those whose diabetes therapy was continued at discharge, patients who were not prescribed a glucose-lowering agent had higher 1-year mortality rate (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.15 to 1.45). Readmission rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.03). CONCLUSIONS: In older patients with diabetes after AMI, discontinuation of antihyperglycemic therapy is common and associated with higher mortality rates. The reasons behind this practice as well as the specific effects of hyperglycemia after AMI merit further study.

Improving clinical productivity in the academic setting: a novel incentive plan based on utility theory.

PURPOSE: Academic internal medicine practices face growing challenges to financial viability due to high overhead, competing institutional missions, and suboptimal physician productivity. The authors describe the development of a clinical incentive plan for a group of academic subspecialty physicians at the Dana Clinic, an outpatient setting at Yale School of Medicine, and report on results of the first year's experience under the plan. METHOD: Utility theory was used to assess the risk profile of clinic faculty and identify incentive payments that would optimize faculty benefit or "utility" while minimizing departmental costs. Under the plan, physicians who reached a productivity target based on work Relative Value Units (wRVUs) between October 2003 and November 2004 had overhead costs covered and received a fixed payment to support salary; additional incentive payments were available for those exceeding the target. Physicians failing to reach the target were responsible for their own overhead costs and received no fixed payment. Physician productivity as measured by wRVU per full-time equivalent (FTE) was compared for the year prior to, and the year following, incentive plan introduction. RESULTS: Forty-seven members of eight academic sections were included in the analysis. Median productivity improved by 34%, with 42 of 47 physicians showing improvement. Significant improvements were also noted in collections (62%) and visit volume (23%), and shifts were observed in coding patterns. CONCLUSIONS: The unique threshold-based structure of the incentive plan, as determined through utility theory modeling, as well as permitting physicians to choose how to achieve the wRVU target were key features of its success, resulting in improved productivity without increasing practice resources or faculty salaries.

Metformin and thiazolidinedione use in Medicare patients with heart failure.

CONTEXT: According to package inserts, metformin is contraindicated in diabetic patients receiving drug treatment for heart failure therapy, and thiazolidinediones are not recommended in diabetic patients with symptoms of advanced heart failure. Little is known about patterns of use of these antihyperglycemic drugs in diabetic patients with heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportions of patients hospitalized with heart failure and concomitant diabetes treated with metformin or thiazolidinediones. DESIGN: Serial cross-sectional measurements using data from retrospective medical record abstraction. SETTING: Nongovernmental acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Two nationally representative samples of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with the primary diagnosis of heart failure and concomitant diabetes between April 1998 and March 1999 and between July 2000 and June 2001. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The prescription of either metformin or a thiazolidinedione at hospital discharge. RESULTS: In the 1998-1999 sample (n = 12 505), 7.1% of patients were discharged with a prescription for metformin, 7.2% with a prescription for a thiazolidinedione, and 13.5% with a prescription for either drug. In the 2000-2001 sample (n = 13 158), metformin use increased to 11.2%, thiazolidinedione use to 16.1%, and use of either drug to 24.4% (P<.001 for all comparisons). Similar increases were seen among patients of all age groups, all races, and both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of metformin and thiazolidinediones is common and has increased rapidly in Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes and heart failure in direct contrast with explicit warnings against this practice by the Food and Drug Administration. Further studies to establish the safety and effectiveness of this practice are needed to ensure optimal care of patients with diabetes and heart failure.