Effects of Macronutrient Intake and Number of Meals on Glycemic Outcomes Over 1 Year in Youth with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: Insulin bolus doses derive from glucose levels and planned carbohydrate intake, although fat and protein impact glycemic excursions. We examined the impact of macronutrients and number of daily meals/snacks on glycemic outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes. Methods: Youth (N = 136, ages 8-17) with type 1 diabetes completed 3-day food records, wore 3-day masked continuous glucose monitoring, and had A1c measurements every 3 months for 1 year. Diet data were analyzed using Nutrition Data System for Research. Longitudinal mixed models assessed effects of macronutrient intake and number of meals/snacks on glycemic outcomes. Results: At baseline, youth (48% male) had mean age of 12.8 ± 2.5 years and diabetes duration of 5.9 ± 3.1 years; 73% used insulin pumps. Baseline A1c was 8.1% ± 1.0%, percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL (%TIR) was 49% ± 17%, % time below range <70 mg/dL (%TBR) was 6% ± 8%, % time above range >180 mg/dL (%TAR) was 44% ± 20%, and glycemic variability as coefficient of variation (CV) was 41% ± 8%; macronutrient intake included 48% ± 5% carbohydrate, 36% ± 5% fat, and 16% ± 2% protein. Most youth (56%) reported 3-4 meals/snacks daily (range 1-9). Over 1 year, greater carbohydrate intake was associated with lower A1c (P = 0.0003), more %TBR (P = 0.0006), less %TAR (P = 0.002), and higher CV (P = 0.03). Greater fat intake was associated with higher A1c (P = 0.006), less %TBR (P = 0.002), and more %TAR (P = 0.005). Greater protein intake was associated with higher A1c (P = 0.01). More daily meals/snacks were associated with lower A1c (P = 0.001), higher %TIR (P = 0.0006), and less %TAR (P = 0.0001). Conclusions: Both fat and protein impact glycemic outcomes. Future automated insulin delivery systems should consider all macronutrients for timely insulin provision. The present research study derived from secondary analysis of the study registered under NCT00999375.

Two Years with a Tubeless Automated Insulin Delivery System: A Single-Arm Multicenter Trial in Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: The Omnipod® 5 Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System was shown to be safe and effective following 3 months of use in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D); however, data on the durability of these results are limited. This study evaluated the long-term safety and effectiveness of Omnipod 5 use in people with T1D during up to 2 years of use. Materials and Methods: After a 3-month single-arm, multicenter, pivotal trial in children (6-13.9 years) and adolescents/adults (14-70 years), participants could continue system use in an extension phase. HbA1c was measured every 3 months for up to 15 months; continuous glucose monitor metrics were collected for up to 2 years. Results: Participants (N = 224) completed median (interquartile range) 22.3 (21.7, 22.7) months of AID. HbA1c was reduced in the pivotal trial from 7.7% ± 0.9% in children and 7.2% ± 0.9% in adolescents/adults to 7.0% ± 0.6% and 6.8% ± 0.7%, respectively, (P < 0.0001), and was maintained at 7.2% ± 0.7% and 6.9% ± 0.6% after 15 months (P < 0.0001 from baseline). Time in target range (70-180 mg/dL) increased from 52.4% ± 15.6% in children and 63.6% ± 16.5% in adolescents/adults at baseline to 67.9% ± 8.0% and 73.8% ± 10.8%, respectively, during the pivotal trial (P < 0.0001) and was maintained at 65.9% ± 8.9% and 72.9% ± 11.3% during the extension (P < 0.0001 from baseline). One episode of diabetic ketoacidosis and seven episodes of severe hypoglycemia occurred during the extension. Children and adolescents/adults spent median 96.1% and 96.3% of time in Automated Mode, respectively. Conclusion: Our study supports that long-term use of the Omnipod 5 AID System can safely maintain improvements in glycemic outcomes for up to 2 years of use in people with T1D. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT04196140.

Diabetes Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Medicare Fee-For-Service Plans: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Medicare Advantage (MA), Medicare's managed care program, is quickly expanding, yet little is known about diabetes care quality delivered under MA compared with traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years old enrolled in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry from 2014 to 2019 with type 2 diabetes treated with one or more antihyperglycemic therapies. Quality measures, cardiometabolic risk factor control, and antihyperglycemic prescription patterns were compared between Medicare plan groups, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Among 345,911 Medicare beneficiaries, 229,598 (66%) were enrolled in FFS and 116,313 (34%) in MA plans (for ≥1 month). MA beneficiaries were more likely to receive ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers for coronary artery disease, tobacco cessation counseling, and screening for retinopathy, foot care, and kidney disease (adjusted P ≤ 0.001 for all). MA beneficiaries had modestly but significantly higher systolic blood pressure (+0.2 mmHg), LDL cholesterol (+2.6 mg/dL), and HbA1c (+0.1%) (adjusted P < 0.01 for all). MA beneficiaries were independently less likely to receive glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (6.9% vs. 9.0%; adjusted odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.77-0.84) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (5.4% vs. 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). When integrating Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked data from 2014 to 2017 and more recent unlinked data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry through 2019 (total N = 411,465), these therapeutic differences persisted, including among subgroups with established cardiovascular and kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: While MA plans enable greater access to preventive care, this may not translate to improved intermediate health outcomes. MA beneficiaries are also less likely to receive newer antihyperglycemic therapies with proven outcome benefits in high-risk individuals. Long-term health outcomes under various Medicare plans requires surveillance.

How introduction of automated insulin delivery systems may influence psychosocial outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: Findings from the first investigation with the Omnipod® 5 System.

AIMS: To evaluate psychosocial outcomes for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using the tubeless Omnipod® 5 Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System. METHODS: A single-arm, multicenter (across the United States), prospective safety and efficacy study of the tubeless AID system included 115 adults with T1D. Participants aged 18-70 years completed questionnaires assessing psychosocial outcomes - diabetes distress (T1-DDS), hypoglycemic confidence (HCS), well-being (WHO-5), sleep quality (PSQI), insulin delivery satisfaction (IDSS), diabetes treatment satisfaction (DTSQ), and system usability (SUS) - before and after 3 months of AID use. Associations among participant characteristics, psychosocial measures and glycemic outcomes were evaluated using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Adults using the tubeless AID system demonstrated improvements in diabetes-specific psychosocial measures, including diabetes distress, hypoglycemic confidence, insulin delivery satisfaction, diabetes treatment satisfaction, and system usability after 3 months (all P < 0.001). No changes in general well-being or sleep quality were observed. The psychosocial outcomes assessed were not consistently associated with baseline participant characteristics (i.e., age, sex, diabetes duration, glycemic outcomes including percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL, percent time below range < 70 mg/dL, hemoglobin A1c, or insulin regimen). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Omnipod 5 AID system was associated with significant improvements in diabetes-related psychosocial outcomes for adults with T1D. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04196140.

Multicenter Trial of a Tubeless, On-Body Automated Insulin Delivery System With Customizable Glycemic Targets in Pediatric and Adult Participants With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Advances in diabetes technology have transformed the treatment paradigm for type 1 diabetes, yet the burden of disease is significant. We report on a pivotal safety study of the first tubeless, on-body automated insulin delivery system with customizable glycemic targets. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This single-arm, multicenter, prospective study enrolled 112 children (age 6-13.9 years) and 129 adults (age 14-70 years). A 2-week standard therapy phase (usual insulin regimen) was followed by 3 months of automated insulin delivery. Primary safety outcomes were incidence of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis. Primary effectiveness outcomes were change in HbA1c and percent time in sensor glucose range 70-180 mg/dL ("time in range"). RESULTS: A total of 235 participants (98% of enrolled, including 111 children and 124 adults) completed the study. HbA1c was significantly reduced in children by 0.71% (7.8 mmol/mol) (mean ± SD: 7.67 ± 0.95% to 6.99 ± 0.63% [60 ± 10.4 mmol/mol to 53 ± 6.9 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001) and in adults by 0.38% (4.2 mmol/mol) (7.16 ± 0.86% to 6.78 ± 0.68% [55 ± 9.4 mmol/mol to 51 ± 7.4 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). Time in range was improved from standard therapy by 15.6 ± 11.5% or 3.7 h/day in children and 9.3 ± 11.8% or 2.2 h/day in adults (both P < 0.0001). This was accomplished with a reduction in time in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL among adults (median [interquartile range]: 2.00% [0.63, 4.06] to 1.09% [0.46, 1.75], P < 0.0001), while this parameter remained the same in children. There were three severe hypoglycemia events not attributable to automated insulin delivery malfunction and one diabetic ketoacidosis event from an infusion site failure. CONCLUSIONS: This tubeless automated insulin delivery system was safe and allowed participants to significantly improve HbA1c levels and time in target glucose range with a very low occurrence of hypoglycemia.

Behavior-based diabetes management: impact on care, hospitalizations, and costs.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) examine the impact of the Diabetes Care Rewards (DCR) program on adherence to care standards and (2) evaluate the economic impact of adherence to care standards. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective observational cohort study design with propensity matching. Additional covariates adjustment was used to minimize residual imbalance. METHODS: Utilization and cost data were compared between individuals enrolled vs individuals eligible for but not enrolled in the DCR program using a standard mean difference. Individuals were employees or their dependents from self-insured companies throughout the United States. Outcomes included adherence to the care standards, service utilization, and costs. RESULTS: A total of 3318 propensity-matched participants were included. Primary analysis revealed that enrolled members increased adherence to semiannual glycated hemoglobin, annual lipid, and annual urine albumin-creatinine ratio testing. Additionally, enrolled members experienced less utilization of high-acuity services and increased rates of physician visits. In a secondary analysis, the enrolled group was associated with greater pharmaceutical costs but lower medical costs. CONCLUSIONS: A behavioral science- and incentive-based diabetes management program was associated with greater rates of adherence to recommended diabetes monitoring care standards, increased routine clinic visits, decreased hospital admissions, and decreased inpatient days. Anticipated increases in pharmaceutical expenditures were offset by overall lower medical expenditures. Results indicate the economic benefits of adherence to evidence-based standards for diabetes care.

Improved Glycemic Control Following Transition to Tubeless Insulin Pump Therapy in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) treatment may improve long-term glycemic outcomes and enhance quality of life compared with a multiple daily injection (MDI) insulin regimen for people with type 1 diabetes. As the number of people treated with CSII via a tubeless insulin pump is increasing, there is growing interest in the long-term glycemic outcomes of this treatment option across diverse populations. This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated glycemic control in 156 adults with type 1 diabetes initiating tubeless insulin pump therapy following transition from either MDI or CSII with a tubed insulin pump. In this study, use of the tubeless insulin pump over 12 months was associated with significant improvement in A1C in adults with type 1 diabetes, most notably in those with an A1C ≥9.0% and those previously treated with MDI.

Regional differences in the management of cardiovascular risk factors among adults with diabetes: An evaluation of the Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

AIMS: To compare cardiovascular risk factor control in adults with diabetes participating in a national diabetes registry to those in the general population and to ascertain regional differences in diabetes care. METHODS: Adults with diagnosed diabetes in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR) were compared with those in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2015 to 2016; standardized mean difference (SMD) > 0.2 defined significance. Regional differences were assessed in the DCR cohort; p < .05 defined significance. RESULTS: The DCR cohort was older (61 vs. 57 years, SMD = 0.38), more insured (99.7% vs. 91.0%, SMD = 0.42), and less ethnically diverse (83% non-Hispanic white vs. 76%, SMD = 0.30) compared with NHANES. The proportion of overweight/obesity, A1c < 7% (<53 mmol/mol), and BP < 140/90 were similar, but DCR participants had higher proportion with LDL < 2.59 mmol/L (61% vs. 41%, SMD = 0.39) and fewer tobacco users (17% vs. 32%, SMD = 0.35). Regionally, obesity, lack of glycaemic control, and tobacco use were highest in the Midwest, BP control was the lowest in the South, and LDL control was lowest in the Northeast. CONCLUSIONS: Significant regional differences in diabetes care delivery and outcomes were identified using a national diabetes registry. Serial analyses of the DCR may supplement national evaluations to deepen our understanding of diabetes care in the US.

Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Findings from Prospective Real-life T1D Exchange Registry.

CONTEXT: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of mortality in adults with type 1 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: We prospectively evaluated CVD risk factors in a large, contemporary cohort of adults with type 1 diabetes living in the United States. DESIGN: Observational study of CVD and CVD risk factors over a median of 5.3 years. SETTING: The T1D Exchange clinic network. PATIENTS: Adults (age ≥ 18 years) with type 1 diabetes and without known CVD diagnosed before or at enrollment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Associations between CVD risk factors and incident CVD were assessed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 8,727 participants (53% female, 88% non-Hispanic white, median age 33 years [interquartile ratio {IQR} = 21, 48], type 1 diabetes duration 16 years [IQR = 9, 26]). At enrollment, median HbA1c was 7.6% (66 mmol/mol) (IQR = 6.9 [52], 8.6 [70]), 33% used a statin, and 37% used blood pressure medication. Over a mean follow-up of 4.6 years, 325 (3.7%) participants developed incident CVD. Ischemic heart disease was the most common CVD event. Increasing age, body mass index, HbA1c, presence of hypertension and dyslipidemia, increasing duration of diabetes, and diabetic nephropathy were associated with increased risk for CVD. There were no significant gender differences in CVD risk. CONCLUSION: HbA1c, hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetic nephropathy are important risk factors for CVD in adults with type 1 diabetes. A longer follow-up is likely required to assess the impact of other traditional CVD risk factors on incident CVD in the current era.

Real-world opportunity of empagliflozin to improve blood pressure control in African American patients with type 2 diabetes: A National Cardiovascular Data Registry "research-to-practice" project from the diabetes collaborative registry.

The 1245.29 Trial recently showed that empaglifozin improved both blood pressure and glucose control in African American (AA) patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension. Using the Diabetes Collaborative Registry, a large-scale US registry of outpatients with diabetes recruited from primary care, cardiology and endocrinology practices, we sought to understand the potential impact of these observations in routine clinical practice. Among 74 290 AA patients with T2D from 368 US clinics, 60.4% had hypertension, of whom 34.5% had systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mm Hg (20.8% of the total AA T2D population). Only 1.7% of this eligible population had been prescribed a sodium-glucose co-transporter two inhibitor. The mean estimated 5-year risk of cardiovascular death was 7.7%, which could be reduced to 6.2% when modelling the antihypertensive effect of empagliflozin across the eligible population (based on an 8-mm Hg blood pressure reduction). These findings may represent a potential opportunity for better management of cardiovascular risk factors and improved outcomes in this vulnerable cohort.

Assessing use of patient-focused pharmacotherapy in glycemic management through the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR).

BACKGROUND: Although practice guidelines stress individualization of glucose management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the extent to which providers take patient factors into account when selecting medications is not well known. METHODS: Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR) is an outpatient diabetes registry including primary care, cardiology, and endocrinology practices. T2D medications were grouped as those which may be suboptimal for key patient subgroups, and we examined patient factors associated with use of these agents using hierarchical, multivariable Poisson models. RESULTS: In DCR, 157,551 patients from 374 US practices were prescribed a glucose-lowering medication. Patients with morbid obesity were more likely treated with medications prone to cause weight gain (relative rate [RR] 1.09, 95% CI 1.07-1.11). Older patients were more likely to be treated with medications with increased risk of hypoglycemia (RR 1.04 per 5 years, 95% CI 1.04-1.05). Patients with CKD 4/5 were less likely to be treated with agents with known risk in patients with advanced CKD (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.77). Patients with coronary artery disease were no more or less likely to be treated with medications with potential cardiovascular safety issues (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.01). CONCLUSIONS: We observed some targeted use of glucose-lowering therapies in certain subgroups but also identified potential opportunities for better personalization of treatment. Data sources such as the DCR can highlight potential areas for improving targeted approaches to pharmacologic therapy in order to optimize selection of patients most likely to benefit (and least likely to be harmed) from treatments.

Use of Intensive Glycemic Management in Older Adults with Diabetes Mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the proportion of older adults with diabetes mellitus treated with tight glucose control and the factors associated with this practice. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Outpatient sites in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (N=151). PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 75 and older with type 2 diabetes mellitus (N=42,669). MEASUREMENTS: Participants were categorized based on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and glucose-lowering medications: poor control (HbA1c >9%), moderate control (HbA1c 8-9%), conservative control (HbA1c 7-8%), tight control (HbA1c <7%) with low-risk agents (low risk for hypoglycemia), tight control with high-risk agents, and diet control (HbA1c <7% taking no glucose-lowering medications). We used hierarchical logistic regression to examine participant and site factors associated with tight control and high-risk agents versus conservative or tight control and low-risk agents. RESULTS: Of 30,696 participants without diet-controlled diabetes, 5,596 (18%) had moderate or poor control, 9,227 (30%) had conservative control, 7,893 (26%) had tight control taking low-risk agents, and 7,980 (26%) had tight control taking high-risk agents. Older age, male sex, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and coronary artery disease were each independently associated with greater odds of tight control with high-risk agents. There were no differences according to practice specialty (endocrinology, primary care, cardiology) in how aggressively participants were managed. CONCLUSION: One-quarter of U.S. older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus are tightly controlled with glucose-lowering medications that have a high risk of hypoglycemia. These results suggest potential overtreatment of a substantial proportion of people and should encourage further efforts to translate guidelines to daily practice.

Disordered Eating Behaviors Are Not Increased by an Intervention to Improve Diet Quality but Are Associated With Poorer Glycemic Control Among Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines whether participation in an 18-month behavioral intervention shown previously to improve overall diet quality inadvertently increases disordered eating behaviors (DEBs) in youth with type 1 diabetes and investigates the association of DEB with multiple measures of glycemic control and variability. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants reported DEB and diabetes management at baseline and 6, 12, and 18 months; masked continuous glucose monitoring, HbA1c, and 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) were obtained concurrently. Linear mixed models estimated the intervention effect on DEB, the association of DEB with diabetes adherence and measures of glycemic control and variability, and whether DEB modified glycemic trajectories. RESULTS: There was no intervention effect on DEB (P = 0.84). DEB was associated with higher HbA1c (P = 0.001), mean sensor glucose (P = 0.001), and percent sensor glucose values >180 mg/dL (P = <0.001); with lower 1,5-AG (P = 0.01); and with worse diabetes adherence (P = 0.03). DEB was not associated with percent sensor glucose values <70 mg/dL or any measures of glycemic variability. There was a significant DEB × time interaction effect for mean sensor glucose (P = 0.05) and percent sensor glucose values >180 mg/dL (P = 0.04). Participants reporting less DEB had a developmentally expected deterioration in glycemic control throughout the study. Participants reporting more DEB had poor glycemic control at baseline that remained poor throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show a potential to improve diet quality without increasing DEB and indicate an association of DEB with persistent hyperglycemia but not hypoglycemia or glycemic variability.

Implementation of Care Management: An Analysis of Recent AHRQ Research.

Care management (CM) is a promising team-based, patient-centered approach "designed to assist patients and their support systems in managing medical conditions more effectively." As little is known about its implementation, this article describes CM implementation and associated lessons from 12 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-sponsored projects. Two rounds of data collection resulted in project-specific narratives that were analyzed using an iterative approach analogous to framework analysis. Informants also participated as coauthors. Variation emerged across practices and over time regarding CM services provided, personnel delivering these services, target populations, and setting(s). Successful implementation was characterized by resource availability (both monetary and nonmonetary), identifying as well as training employees with the right technical expertise and interpersonal skills, and embedding CM within practices. Our findings facilitate future context-specific implementation of CM within medical homes. They also inform the development of medical home recognition programs that anticipate and allow for contextual variation.

Real-world use and modeled impact of glucose-lowering therapies evaluated in recent cardiovascular outcomes trials: An NCDR® Research to Practice project.

Aims Recent trials (EMPA-REG OUTCOME and Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results [LEADER]) have shown improved cardiovascular (CV) mortality with specific currently available glucose-lowering medications (empagliflozin and liraglutide, respectively), but were limited to selected patient populations. We sought to evaluate the current use and potential real-world impact of empagliflozin (and other sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors [SGLT2is]) and liraglutide (and other glucagonlike peptide-1 receptor agonist [GLP-1 RAs]) among patients in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR). Methods and results We evaluated 182,525 patients from the DCR - a large, US-based outpatient registry of individuals with type 2 diabetes from 313 sites that included cardiology, endocrinology and primary care practices. Among these patients, 26.2% met major eligibility criteria for EMPA-REG OUTCOME and 48.0% met major eligibility criteria for LEADER. Of these potentially eligible patients, only a small minority were actually prescribed these agents: 5.2% on an SGLT2i and 6.0% on a GLP-1 RA, respectively. Patients receiving these studied medications or medication classes, in general, had lower CV disease burden compared with those not on these agents. Assuming similar risk reductions as in the clinical trials, if all potentially trial-eligible patients in the DCR were treated for 1 year with empagliflozin (or other SGLT2is, assuming a class effect) or liraglutide (or other GLP-1 RAs, assuming a class effect), this may have prevented 354 CV deaths, 231 heart failure hospitalizations, 329 CV deaths and 247 myocardial infarctions, respectively. Conclusion In a large, US-based outpatient registry, we found a significant number of patients would have been potentially eligible for glucose-lowering agents that demonstrated CV benefit in recent clinical trials. In view of these findings, a broader and better-targeted use of these medications in evidence-based patient populations should be considered.

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.

Changes in HbA1c and Weight Following Transition to Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Historically, intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes (T1D) has improved glycemic control at the risk of adverse weight gain. The impact of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy (CSII) on weight in the current era remains unknown. We assessed changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and weight in adults with T1D transitioning to CSII at 2 diabetes centers in Denmark and the United States. METHODS: Patients with T1D, aged ≥18 years, managed with multiple daily injections (MDI) who transitioned to CSII between 2002 and 2013 were identified using electronic health record data from the Steno Diabetes Center (n = 600) and Joslin Diabetes Center (n = 658). Changes in HbA1c and weight after 1 year was assessed overall and by baseline HbA1c cut points. Multivariate regression assessed correlates of HbA1c reduction. RESULTS: In adults with T1D transitioning to CSII, clinically significant HbA1c reductions were found in patients with baseline HbA1c 8.0-8.9% (Steno, -0.7%; Joslin, -0.4%) and baseline HbA1c ≥9.0% (Steno, -1.1%; Joslin, -0.9%) ( P < .005 for all). Overall, there was no significant change in weight after 1 year at either center. Modest (<2%) weight gain was noted in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥9% at Steno (1.1 ± 0.3 kg, P < .0001) and Joslin (1.7 ± 1.1, P < .005). In multivariate models, HbA1c reduction was associated with higher HbA1c, older age, female sex at Steno ( R2 = .28, P < .005), but only higher baseline HbA1c at Joslin ( R2 = .19, P < .005). CONCLUSION: Adults with T1D with suboptimal glycemic control significantly improved HbA1c without a negative impact on weight 1 year after transitioning from MDI to CSII.

Predictive Model for Estimating the Cost of Incident Diabetes Complications.

BACKGROUND: The cost of diabetes care accounts for a significant proportion of healthcare expenditures. Cost models based on updated incident complication rates and associated costs are needed to improve financial planning and quality assessment across the U.S. healthcare system. We developed a cost model using published data to estimate the direct medical costs of incident diabetes-related complications in a U.S. population of adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and TRIP databases was conducted on studies reporting the incidence and/or cost of diabetes-related complications (cardiovascular disease, neuropathy, nephropathy, ophthalmological disease, and acute metabolic events). A total of 54 studies met eligibility criteria. A baseline model was constructed for a U.S. population with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus and used to determine the expected costs of managing such a population over 1-, 3-, and 5-year time horizons. RESULTS: The most costly incident complications in a population of 10,000 adults with diabetes were (1) congestive heart failure (CHF): annual expected cost of $7,320,287, 5-year expected cost of $50,697,865; (2) end-stage renal disease (ESRD): annual expected cost of $4,225,384, 5-year expected cost of $13,211,204; and (3) gangrene: annual expected cost of $2,844,381, 5-year expected cost of $17,200,417. CONCLUSIONS: This cost model estimates the direct healthcare costs of incident diabetes-related complications in a U.S. adult population with diabetes and provides a benchmark for evaluating the cost-effectiveness and potential leakage within a care delivery network.

Can Families Eat Better Without Spending More? Improving Diet Quality Does Not Increase Diet Cost in a Randomized Clinical Trial among Youth with Type 1 Diabetes and Their Parents.

BACKGROUND: Although cost is a frequently cited barrier to healthful eating, limited prospective data exist. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of diet cost with diet quality change. DESIGN: An 18-month randomized clinical trial evaluated a dietary intervention. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Youth with type 1 diabetes duration ≥1 year, age 8.0 to 16.9 years, receiving care at an outpatient tertiary diabetes center in Boston, MA, participated along with a parent from 2010 to 2013 (N=136). Eighty-two percent of participants were from middle- to upper-income households. INTERVENTION: The family-based behavioral intervention targeted intake of whole plant foods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diet quality as indicated by the Healthy Eating Index 2005 (HEI-2005) (which measures conformance to the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans) and whole plant food density (cup or ounce equivalents per 1,000 kcal target food groups) were calculated from 3-day food records of youth and parent dietary intake at six and four time points, respectively. Food prices were obtained from two online supermarkets common to the study location. Daily diet cost was calculated by summing prices of reported foods. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Random effects models estimated treatment group differences in time-varying diet cost. Separate models for youth and parent adjusted for covariates examined associations of time-varying change in diet quality with change in diet cost. RESULTS: There was no treatment effect on time-varying diet cost for either youth (ß -.49, 95% CI -1.07 to 0.08; P=0.10) or parents (ß .24, 95% CI -1.61 to 2.08; P=0.80). In addition, time-varying change in diet quality indicators was not associated with time-varying change in diet cost for youth. Among parents, a 1-cup or 1-oz equivalent increase in whole plant food density was associated with a $0.63/day lower diet cost (ß -.63, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.05; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Improved diet quality was not accompanied by greater cost for youth with type 1 diabetes and their parents participating in a randomized clinical trial. Findings challenge the prevailing assumption that improving diet quality necessitates greater cost.

IMPROVEMENTS IN METABOLIC CONTROL IN ADULTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES FOLLOWING REFERRAL TO A DIABETES CENTER, 2005-2010.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare metabolic control in adults with diabetes in the general population to those newly referred to a diabetes center and after 1 year of specialty care. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparison of adults with diabetes aged ≥20 years data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, n = 1,674) and a diabetes center (n = 3,128) from 2005-2010. NHANES participants represented the civilian, non-institutionalized U.S. POPULATION: Diabetes center referrals lived primarily around eastern Massachusetts. The proportion attaining targets for glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1c), blood pressure (BP), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, or all 3 (ABC control) and the proportion prescribed medications to lower A1c, BP, or cholesterol were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared to the general sample, a smaller proportion of new diabetes center referrals had A1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol, 24% vs. 53%, P<.001), BP <130/80 mm Hg (38% vs. 50%, P<.001), and ABC control (5.6% vs. 17%, P<.001) but not LDL<100 mg/dL (<2.6 mmol/L, 54% vs. 53%, P = .65). After 1 year, more diabetes center referrals attained targets for A1c (40%), BP (38%), LDL (67%), and ABC control (15%) (P<.001 for all versus baseline). ABC control was not different between the general sample and diabetes center referrals at 1 year (P = .16). After 1 year, a greater percentage of diabetes center referrals compared to the general sample were prescribed medications to lower glucose (95% vs. 72%), BP (79% vs. 64%), and cholesterol (77% vs. 54%)(all P<.001). CONCLUSION: Compared to the general population, glycemic control was significantly worse for adults newly referred to the diabetes center. Within 1 year of specialty care, ABC control increased 270% in the setting of significant therapy escalation. ABBREVIATIONS: A1c = glycated hemoglobin A1c ABC = composite of A1c, blood pressure, and cholesterol ACEi = angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker BMI = body mass index BP = blood pressure EHR = electronic health record LDL = low-density lipoprotein NCHS = National Center for Health Statistics NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey PCP = primary care provider.