Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care ; 12(1)2024 Feb 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38413175

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: To examine the role of telehealth in diabetes care and management during versus pre-COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included adults (≥18 years) with prevalent diabetes as of January 1, 2018, and continuously enrolled at Kaiser Permanente Georgia through December 31, 2021 (n=22,854). We defined pre (2018-2019) and during COVID-19 (2020-2021) periods. Logistic generalized estimating equations (GEEs) assessed the within-subject change in adherence to seven annual routine care processes (blood pressure (BP), hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), cholesterol, creatinine, urine-albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR), eye and foot examinations) pre versus during COVID-19 among telehealth users (ie, more than one telehealth visit per year per period) and non-telehealth users. Linear GEE compared mean laboratory measurements pre versus during COVID-19 by telehealth use. RESULTS: The proportion of telehealth users increased from 38.7% (2018-2019) to 91.5% (2020-2021). During (vs pre) the pandemic, adherence to all care processes declined in telehealth (range: 1.6% for foot examinations to 12.4% for BP) and non-telehealth users (range: 1.9% for foot examinations to 40.7% for BP). In telehealth users, average HbA1c (mean difference: 0.4% (95% CI 0.2% to 0.6%), systolic BP (1.62 mm Hg (1.44 to 1.81)), and creatinine (0.03 mg/dL (0.02 to 0.04)), worsened during (vs pre) COVID-19, while low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol improved (-9.08 mg/dL (-9.77 to -8.39)). For UACR, odds of elevated risk of kidney disease increased by 48% (OR 1.48 (1.36-1.62)). Patterns were similar in non-telehealth users. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth use increased during the pandemic and alleviated some of the observed declines in routine diabetes care and management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Diabetes Mellitus , Telemedicine , Adult , Humans , Pandemics , Creatinine , Glycated Hemoglobin , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cholesterol
2.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37433697

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on annual adherence to seven diabetes care guidelines and risk factor management among people with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included all adults (aged ≥18 years) with prevalent diabetes as of 1 January 2018, who were continuously enrolled at Kaiser Permanente Georgia (KPGA) through 31 December 2021 (n=22 854). Prevalent diabetes was defined as a history of at least one of a diagnosis code for diabetes, use of antihyperglycemic medication, or at least one laboratory value of HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose or random glucose in the diabetic range. We defined pre-COVID (2018-2019) and during COVID (2020-2021) cohorts. Cohort-specific laboratory measurements (ie, blood pressure (BP), HbA1c, cholesterol, creatinine, urine-albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR)) and procedures (ie, eye and foot examinations) were determined from KPGA's electronic medical record data. We used logistic generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusted for baseline age, to assess the within-subject change in guideline adherence (ie, at least one measurement per year per period) from pre-COVID to during COVID era overall, and by age, sex, and race. Linear GEE compared mean laboratory measurements pre and during COVID. RESULTS: The proportion of adults meeting each of the seven diabetes care guidelines decreased significantly during (vs pre) COVID (range in absolute reductions: -0.8% to -11.2%) with greatest reductions seen for BP (-11.2%) and cholesterol (-8.8%). Declines were similar across age, sex, and race subgroups. Average HbA1c and systolic BP increased 0.11% and 1.6 mmHg, respectively, while low-density lipoprotein cholesterol declined 8.9 mg/dL. The proportion of adults at high risk of kidney disease (ie, UACR ≥300 mg/g) increased from 6.5% to 9.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In an integrated healthcare system, the proportion of people with diabetes meeting guideline-recommended screenings decreased during the pandemic, coinciding with worsening glucose, kidney, and (some) cardiovascular risk profiles. Follow-up is needed to assess the long-term implications of these care gaps.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Adult , Humans , United States , Adolescent , Pandemics , Creatinine , Glycated Hemoglobin , COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology
3.
Am J Prev Med ; 62(4): 614-625, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35151523

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Several interventions have been found to be effective for reversing prediabetes in adults. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the effectiveness of such interventions. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published between January 1, 2000 and June 27, 2018. RCTs in adults with prediabetes, testing nonsurgical interventions lasting for ≥3 months, and reporting the number of participants achieving normal glucose levels at intervention end were eligible. The pooled risk difference and number needed to treat for achieving normoglycemia were estimated using a random-effects, arm-based network meta-analysis. The strength of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Data were obtained in 2018 and analyzed in 2019 and 2021. RESULTS: Of 54 studies included in the systematic review, 47 were meta-analyzed (n=26,460, mean age=53 years, 46% male, 31% White). Studies included 27 arms testing lifestyle modification interventions, 25 testing medications, 5 testing dietary supplements, and 10 testing Chinese medicine. There were 35 control/placebo arms. At a median follow-up of 1.6 years, more participants in the lifestyle modification groups achieved normoglycemia than those in the control (risk difference=0.18, number needed to treat=6). The strength of the evidence was strong for lifestyle modification. Over a median follow-up of 2.7 years, more participants receiving glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (risk difference=0.47, number needed to treat=2), α-glucosidase inhibitors (risk difference=0.29, number needed to treat=4), and insulin sensitizers (risk difference=0.23, number needed to treat=4) achieved normoglycemia than control. The strength of evidence was moderate for these medications. DISCUSSION: Although several pharmacological approaches can reverse prediabetes, lifestyle modification provides the strongest evidence of effectiveness and should remain the recommended approach to address this condition.


Subject(s)
Prediabetic State , Adult , Female , Humans , Life Style , Male , Middle Aged , Network Meta-Analysis , Prediabetic State/therapy
4.
JAMA Intern Med ; 177(12): 1808-1817, 2017 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29114778

ABSTRACT

Importance: Diabetes prevention is imperative to slow worldwide growth of diabetes-related morbidity and mortality. Yet the long-term efficacy of prevention strategies remains unknown. Objective: To estimate aggregate long-term effects of different diabetes prevention strategies on diabetes incidence. Data Sources: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. The initial search was conducted on January 14, 2014, and was updated on February 20, 2015. Search terms included prediabetes, primary prevention, and risk reduction. Study Selection: Eligible randomized clinical trials evaluated lifestyle modification (LSM) and medication interventions (>6 months) for diabetes prevention in adults (age ≥18 years) at risk for diabetes, reporting between-group differences in diabetes incidence, published between January 1, 1990, and January 1, 2015. Studies testing alternative therapies and bariatric surgery, as well as those involving participants with gestational diabetes, type 1 or 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome, were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Reviewers extracted the number of diabetes cases at the end of active intervention in treatment and control groups. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to obtain pooled relative risks (RRs), and reported incidence rates were used to compute pooled risk differences (RDs). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was aggregate RRs of diabetes in treatment vs control participants. Treatment subtypes (ie, LSM components, medication classes) were stratified. To estimate sustainability, post-washout and follow-up RRs for medications and LSM interventions, respectively, were examined. Results: Forty-three studies were included and pooled in meta-analysis (49 029 participants; mean [SD] age, 57.3 [8.7] years; 48.0% [n = 23 549] men): 19 tested medications; 19 evaluated LSM, and 5 tested combined medications and LSM. At the end of the active intervention (range, 0.5-6.3 years), LSM was associated with an RR reduction of 39% (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54-0.68), and medications were associated with an RR reduction of 36% (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.76). The observed RD for LSM and medication studies was 4.0 (95% CI, 1.8-6.3) cases per 100 person-years or a number-needed-to-treat of 25. At the end of the washout or follow-up periods, LSM studies (mean follow-up, 7.2 years; range, 5.7-9.4 years) achieved an RR reduction of 28% (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.86); medication studies (mean follow-up, 17 weeks; range, 2-52 weeks) showed no sustained RR reduction (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.79-1.14). Conclusions and Relevance: In adults at risk for diabetes, LSM and medications (weight loss and insulin-sensitizing agents) successfully reduced diabetes incidence. Medication effects were short lived. The LSM interventions were sustained for several years; however, their effects declined with time, suggesting that interventions to preserve effects are needed.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Primary Prevention , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin Resistance , Life Style , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk , Weight Loss
5.
Prev Med ; 105: 52-57, 2017 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28823754

ABSTRACT

People socially connected with each other often share health risks, possibly due to shared environments and behaviors. In a cohort study, we examined whether incidence of diabetes was different for individuals with recently diagnosed partners compared to individuals similar on other characteristics but whose partners were never diagnosed with diabetes. We analyzed 2007-11 data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), an integrated health system with >3.5 million members. We estimated annual diabetes incidence controlling for demographic, socio-economic, behavioral, and health characteristics. Using propensity score matching and multivariate logistic regression, we compared odds of incident diabetes among co-residing partners ages 18-89years of people who had been diagnosed with diabetes during the previous year (in robustness checks up to the previous three years) and people who had never been diagnosed but were similar on observed characteristics. Partners of newly-diagnosed people had annual diabetes incidence of 16.4/1000, equivalent to10.8 times higher (95%CI: 9.2-12.6) than people whose spouses had never been diagnosed (1.5/1000). Odds remained higher three years after a spouses' diagnosis (45.4 vs. 11.7/1000). Adjusting for other characteristics, odds of diabetes for those with a partner diagnosed in the previous year were 8.7 times higher (CI: 7.4-10.2) than among those whose partner had never been diagnosed. Also, partners of persons with recently-diagnosed diabetes developed diabetes at much higher rates than the general KPNC and U.S. POPULATIONS: Individuals with a recently diagnosed partner could be considered a high-risk population for screening and prevention.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Spouses/statistics & numerical data , California/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors
6.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 210: 231-235, 2017 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28068596

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To test the effect of aspirin and omega 3 on fetal weight as well as feto-maternal blood flow in asymmetrical intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). STUDY DESIGN: This study is a clinically registered (NCT02696577), open, parallel, randomized controlled trial, conducted at Assiut Woman's Health Hospital, Egypt including 80 pregnant women (28-30 weeks) with IUGR. They were randomized either to group I: aspirin or group II: aspirin plus omega 3. The primary outcome was the fetal weight after 6 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included Doppler blood flow changes in both uterine and umbilical arteries, birth weight, time and method of delivery and admission to NICU. The outcome variables were analyzed using paired and unpaired t-test. RESULTS: The estimated fetal weight increased significant in group II more than group I (p=0.00). The uterine and umbilical arteries blood flow increased significantly in group II (p<0.05). The birth weight in group II was higher than that observed in group I (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The using of aspirin with omega 3 is more effective than using aspirin only in increasing fetal weight and improving utero-placental blood flow in IUGR.


Subject(s)
Aspirin/administration & dosage , Fatty Acids, Omega-3/therapeutic use , Fetal Growth Retardation/drug therapy , Fibrinolytic Agents/administration & dosage , Adult , Female , Fetal Weight/drug effects , Humans , Placental Circulation/drug effects , Pregnancy , Young Adult
7.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 31(1): 84-92, 2012 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22232098

ABSTRACT

Continued increases in the prevalence of and disproportionate health spending associated with type 2 diabetes argue for policies focused on preventing that condition and treating it appropriately, even as we strive to improve coordination of care for coexisting chronic diseases. This article argues that four policy paradigm shifts will be necessary to achieve that specific emphasis on type 2 diabetes: conceptually integrating primary and secondary prevention along a clinical continuum; recognizing the central importance of early detection of prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes in implementing cost-effective prevention and control; integrating community and clinical expertise, and resources, within organized and affordable service delivery systems; and sharing and adopting evidence-based policies at the global level.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Health Policy , Internationality , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/organization & administration , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/economics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Humans
8.
Epidemiol Rev ; 33: 63-87, 2011.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21624961

ABSTRACT

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and dysglycemia (impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose) are increasingly contributing to the global burden of diseases. The authors reviewed the published literature to critically evaluate the evidence on screening for both conditions and to identify the gaps in current understanding. Acceptable, relatively simple, and accurate tools can be used to screen for both T2DM and dysglycemia. Lifestyle modification and/or medication (e.g., metformin) are cost-effective in reducing the incidence of T2DM. However, their application is not yet routine practice. It is unclear whether diabetes-prevention strategies, which influence cardiovascular risk favorably, will also prevent diabetic vascular complications. Cardioprotective therapies, which are cost-effective in preventing complications in conventionally diagnosed T2DM, can be used in screen-detected diabetes, but the magnitude of their effects is unknown. Economic modeling suggests that screening for both T2DM and dysglycemia may be cost-effective, although empirical data on tangible benefits in preventing complications or death are lacking. Screening for T2DM is psychologically unharmful, but the specific impact of attributing the label of dysglycemia remains uncertain. Addressing these gaps will inform the development of a screening policy for T2DM and dysglycemia within a holistic diabetes prevention and control framework combining secondary and high-risk primary prevention strategies.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Mass Screening , Cost of Illness , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/economics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Glucose Tolerance Test/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/economics , Prediabetic State/diagnosis , Prediabetic State/economics , Prediabetic State/prevention & control , Prediabetic State/therapy , Risk Factors , Risk Reduction Behavior , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL