Autism spectrum disorders: a meta-analysis of executive function.

Evidence of executive dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders (ASD) across development remains mixed and establishing its role is critical for guiding diagnosis and intervention. The primary objectives of this meta-analysis is to analyse executive function (EF) performance in ASD, the fractionation across EF subdomains, the clinical utility of EF measures and the influence of multiple moderators (for example, age, gender, diagnosis, measure characteristics). The Embase, Medline and PsychINFO databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies published since the inclusion of Autism in DSM-III (1980) up to end of June 2016 that compared EF in ASD with neurotypical controls. A random-effects model was used and moderators were tested using subgroup analysis. The primary outcome measure was Hedges' g effect size for EF and moderator factors. Clinical sensitivity was determined by the overlap percentage statistic (OL%). Results were reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 235 studies comprising 14 081 participants were included (N, ASD=6816, Control=7265). A moderate overall effect size for reduced EF (Hedges' g=0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.53) was found with similar effect sizes across each domain. The majority of moderator comparisons were not significant although the overall effect of executive dysfunction has gradually reduced since the introduction of ASD. Only a small number of EF measures achieved clinical sensitivity. This study confirms a broad executive dysfunction in ASD that is relatively stable across development. The fractionation of executive dysfunction into individual subdomains was not supported, nor was diagnostic sensitivity. Development of feasible EF measures focussing on clinical sensitivity for diagnosis and treatment studies should be a priority.

Diabetes management in an Australian primary care population.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Worldwide studies have shown that significant proportions of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) do not meet targets for glycaemic control, blood pressure (BP) and lipids, putting them at higher risk of developing complications. However, little is known about medicines management in Australian primary care populations with T2DM. The aim of this study was to (i) describe the management of a large group of patients in primary care, (ii) identify areas for improvement in management and (iii) determine any relationship between adherence and glycaemic, BP and lipid control. METHODS: This was a retrospective, epidemiological study of primary care patients with T2DM diabetes, with HbA(1c) of >7%, recruited in 90 Australian community pharmacies. Data collected included demographic details, diabetes history, current medication regimen, height, weight, BP, physical activity and smoking status. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Of the 430 patients, 98% used antidiabetics, 80% antihypertensives, 73% lipid lowering drugs and 38% aspirin. BP and all lipid targets were met by only 21% and 14% of the treated patients and 21% and 12% of the untreated patients respectively. Medication adherence was related to better glycaemic control (P = 0.04). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-base prescribing practice gap was seen in this Australian primary care population of T2DM patients. Patients were undertreated with antihypertensive and lipid lowering medication, and several subgroups with co-morbidities were not receiving the recommended pharmacotherapy. Interventions are required to redress the current evidence-base prescribing practice gap in disease management in primary care.

Diabetes Medication Assistance Service Stage 1: impact and sustainability of glycaemic and lipids control in patients with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate (i) optimal intensity (four visits vs. six visits) and duration (6 vs. 12 months) of the Diabetes Medication Assistance Service in community pharmacy and (ii) sustainability of improvements in patients' diabetes control associated with differing intensities of intervention. METHODS: A national quota sample of 90 community pharmacies in Australia were randomly assigned into group 1 (6-month Diabetes Medication Assistance Service) or group 2 (12-month Diabetes Medication Assistance Service) and subsequently recruited a total of 524 patients. A wide range of clinical (HbA(1c) , blood pressure, lipids) and quality-of-life outcome measures were assessed. RESULTS: The 6- and 12-month Diabetes Medication Assistance Service resulted in significant and similar reductions in HbA(1c) (-0.9 mmol/mol; 95% CI -0.7 to -1.1) -, total cholesterol (-0.3 mmol/l; 95% CI -0.1 to -0.4) and triglycerides (-0.3 mmol/l; 95% CI -0.1 to -0.5). There was also a significant reduction in the number of patients who were at risk of having a cardiovascular event in the next 10 years. For the subset of patients for whom data were available at baseline, completion and 18 months, improvements in HbA(1c) and total cholesterol were sustained at 18 months and triglycerides showed a further improvement at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: The Diabetes Medication Assistance Service resulted in significant improvements in diabetes control that were independent of intensity and duration of the service and showed evidence of being sustained at 18 months. The extent and sustainability of clinical improvements achieved by the Diabetes Medication Assistance Service, together with the resulting reduction in cardiovascular risk, should translate into future cost savings to healthcare systems by delaying and reducing diabetes-related complications.