IDF Diabetes Atlas: A review of studies utilising retinal photography on the global prevalence of diabetes related retinopathy between 2015 and 2018.

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to assess the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) world-wide from articles published since 2015 where the assessment of the presence and severity of DR was based on retinal images. METHODS: A total of 4 databases were searched for the MESH terms diabetic retinopathy and prevalence. Of 112 publications 32 studies were included and individual data pooled for analysis. The presence of any DR or diabetic macular edema (DME) was recorded and severity as mild, moderate or severe non-proliferative DR (NPDR), proliferative DR (PDR) and DME and/or clinically significant macular edema (CSME). The level of severity of DR reported refer to persons with diabetes and not individual eyes. RESULTS: The global prevalence of DR and DME, for the period 2015 to 2019 were 27.0% for any DR comprising of 25.2%, NPDR, 1.4% PDR and 4.6% DME. The lowest prevalence was in Europe at 20.6% and South East Asia at 12.5% and highest in Africa at 33.8%, Middle East and North Africa 33.8%, and the Western Pacific region at 36.2%. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrated difficulties in deriving a meaningful global prevalence rate for DR and DME due to the lack of uniformity in defining the study populations, methodological differences, retinal image capture and grading criteria. Therefore, international consensus is required using a minimal data set for future studies.

Effect of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose, with and without additional TeleCare support, on overall glycaemic control in non-insulin treated Type 2 diabetes: the SMBG Study, a 12-month randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To examine the impact of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose, with or without TeleCare support, on glycaemic control in people with sub-optimally controlled Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a 12-month, multicentre, randomized controlled trial in people with established (>1 year) Type 2 diabetes not on insulin therapy, with sub-optimal glycaemic control [HbA1c ≥58 to ≤119 mmol/mol (≥7.5% to ≤13%)]. A total of 446 participants were randomized to a control group (n =151) receiving usual diabetes care, a group using structured self-monitoring of blood glucose alone (n =147) or a group using structured self-monitoring of blood glucose with additional monthly 'TeleCare' support (n =148). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 323 participants (72%) completed the study; 116 (77%) in the control group, 99 (67%) in the self-monitoring of blood glucose alone group and 108 (73%) in the self-monitoring of blood glucose plus TeleCare group. Compared to baseline, the mean HbA1c was lower in all groups at 12 months, with reductions of 3.3 mmol/mol (95% CI -5.71 to -0.78) or 0.3% (95% CI -0.52 to -0.07; P=0.01) in the control group, 11.4 mmol/mol (95% CI -14.11 to -8.76) or 1.1% (-1.29 to -0.81; P<0.0001) in the group using self-monitoring of blood glucose alone and 12.8 mmol/mol (95% CI -15.34 to -10.31) or 1.2% (95% CI -1.40 to -0.94; P<0.0001) in the group using self-monitoring of blood glucose plus TeleCare. This represents a reduction in HbA1c of 8.9 mmol/mol (95% CI -11.97 to -5.84) or 0.8% (95% CI -1.10 to -0.54; P≤0.0001) with structured self-monitoring of blood glucose compared to the control group. Participants with lower baseline HbA1c , shorter duration of diabetes and higher educational achievement were more likely to achieve HbA1c ≤53 mmol/mol (7.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Structured self-monitoring of blood glucose provides clinical and statistical improvements in glycaemic control in Type 2 diabetes. No additional benefit, over and above the use of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose, was observed in glycaemic control with the addition of once-monthly TeleCare support. (Clinical trial registration no.: ISRCTN21390608).

Clinical relevance of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of insulin degludec (100, 200 U/mL) and insulin glargine (100, 300 U/mL) - a review of evidence and clinical interpretation.

AIM: Second-generation basal insulin analogues (e.g. insulin degludec, insulin glargine 300 U/mL), were designed to further extend the duration of insulin action and reduce within-day and day-to-day variability, and consequently hypoglycaemia risk, versus earlier long-acting basal insulins. This review examines the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics of insulin degludec (100, 200 U/mL) and insulin glargine (100, 300 U/mL), and their influence on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Available pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic publications comparing insulin degludec and insulin glargine were reviewed. RESULTS: Both insulin degludec and insulin glargine 300 U/mL have more prolonged and stable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles than the earlier basal insulin analogue, insulin glargine 100 U/mL. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (0.4 U/kg, morning) showed a more stable pharmacodynamic profile (20% lower within-day variability [P = 0.047]) and more even 24-h distribution (over each 6-h quartile) than insulin degludec 100 U/mL, whereas the supratherapeutic 0.6 U/kg dose demonstrated a similar, albeit non-significant, trend. In contrast, a second clamp study indicated lower day-to-day variability in the 24-h glucose-lowering effect (variance ratio 3.70, P < 0.0001), and more even dosing over each 6-h quartile, with insulin degludec 200 U/mL versus insulin glargine 300 U/mL (0.4 U/kg, evening). Methodological differences and differences in bioequivalence that may explain these discrepancies are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with earlier insulin analogues, second-generation basal insulins have improved pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles that translate into clinical benefits, primarily reduced nocturnal-hypoglycaemia risk. Additional head-to-head comparisons of insulin degludec and insulin glargine 300 U/mL at bioequivalent doses, utilising continuous glucose monitoring and/or real-world evidence, are required to elucidate the differences in their pharmacological and clinical profiles.

The application of simple metrics in the assessment of glycaemic variability.

The assessment of glycaemic variability (GV) remains a subject of debate with many indices proposed to represent either short- (acute glucose fluctuations) or long-term GV (variations of HbA1c). For the assessment of short-term within-day GV, the coefficient of variation for glucose (%CV) defined as the standard deviation adjusted on the 24-h mean glucose concentration is easy to perform and with a threshold of 36%, recently adopted by the international consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring, separating stable from labile glycaemic states. More complex metrics such as the Low Blood Glucose Index (LBGI) or High Blood Glucose Index (HBGI) allow the risk of hypo or hyperglycaemic episodes, respectively to be assessed although in clinical practice its application is limited due to the need for more complex computation. This also applies to other indices of short-term intraday GV including the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE), Shlichtkrull's M-value and CONGA. GV is important clinically as exaggerated glucose fluctuations are associated with an enhanced risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes due primarily to hypoglycaemia. In contrast, there is at present no compelling evidence that elevated short-term GV is an independent risk factor of microvascular complications of diabetes. Concerning long-term GV there are numerous studies supporting its association with an enhanced risk of cardiovascular events. However, this association raises the question as to whether the impact of long-term variability is not simply the consequence of repeated exposure to short-term GV or ambient chronic hyperglycaemia. The renewed emphasis on glucose monitoring with the introduction of continuous glucose monitoring technologies can benefit from the introduction and application of simple metrics for describing GV along with supporting recommendations.

Near normal HbA1c with stable glucose homeostasis: the ultimate target/aim of diabetes therapy.

Achieving near normal glucose homeostasis implies that all components of dysglycemia that are present in diabetes states be eliminated. Reducing ambient/overall hyperglycemia is a pre-requisite to eliminate the risk of development and progression of diabetes complications. More controversially however, are the relative and related contributions of postprandial glucose excursions, glucose variability, hypoglycemia and the dawn phenomenon across the spectrum of dysglycemia. For instance, it is likely that the dawn phenomenon contributes to ambient hyperglycemia and that postprandial glucose excursions are at the cross road of ambient hyperglycemia and glucose variability with glucose fluctuations as causative risk factors for hypoglycemia. Proof-of-concept trials such as the ongoing FLAT-SUGAR study are necessary for gaining further insight into the possible harmful effects of some of these features such as excessive glycemic variability and glucose excursions, still considered to be of minor relevance by several diabetologists. Whether their role will be more thoroughly proven through further intervention trials with "hard" endpoints, remains to be seen. In the meantime more consideration should be given to medications aimed at concomitantly reducing ambient/overall hyperglycemia and those additional abnormal glycemic features of dysglycemia.

Linagliptin treatment in subjects with type 2 diabetes with and without mild-to-moderate renal impairment.

AIMS: Renal disease is a frequent comorbidity of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and an important factor complicating the choice of glucose-lowering drugs. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitor linagliptin (5 mg/day) in mono, dual or triple oral glucose-lowering regimens in subjects with T2DM and mild or moderate renal impairment (RI). METHODS: In this pooled analysis of three 24-week, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials, subjects with mild (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 60-<90 ml/min/1.73 m(2) , n = 838) or moderate RI (30-<60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), n = 93) were compared with subjects with normal renal function (≥90 ml/min/1.73 m(2), n = 1212). RESULTS: Subjects with RI were older, had longer duration of diabetes, and increased prevalence of diabetes-related comorbidities. After 24 weeks, linagliptin achieved consistent placebo-corrected mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes across the three renal function categories: normal (-0.63%; p < 0.0001), mild RI (-0.67%; p < 0.0001) and moderate RI (-0.53%; p < 0.01), with no inter-group difference (p = 0.74). Renal function with linagliptin remained stable across all categories. In linagliptin-treated subjects, overall adverse event (AE) rates and serious AE rates were similar to placebo. The incidence of hypoglycaemia with linagliptin and placebo was 11.1 versus 6.9%, 11.9 versus 9.0% and 15.9 versus 12.0% in the normal, mild RI and moderate RI categories, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis provides evidence that linagliptin is an effective, well-tolerated and convenient treatment in subjects with T2DM and mild or moderate RI.

Lixisenatide, a novel GLP-1 receptor agonist: efficacy, safety and clinical implications for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Recent advances in therapies for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have led to the development of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), which, unlike insulin and sulphonylurea, are effective, with a low risk of hypoglycaemia. Lixisenatide is recommended as a once-daily GLP-1 RA for the treatment of T2DM. In persons with T2DM, lixisenatide 20 µg once-daily given by bolus subcutaneous injection improves insulin secretion and suppresses glucagon secretion in a glucose-dependent manner. Compared with the longer-acting GLP-1 RA liraglutide, lixisenatide achieved a significantly greater reduction in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) during a standardized test breakfast in persons with T2DM otherwise insufficiently controlled on metformin alone. This is primarily due to the greater inhibition of gastric motility by lixisenatide compared with liraglutide. The efficacy and safety of lixisenatide was evaluated across a spectrum of T2DM in a series of phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trials known as the GetGoal programme. Lixisenatide monotherapy or as add-on to oral antidiabetic agents or basal insulin achieved significant reductions in glycated haemoglobin, PPG and fasting plasma glucose, with either weight loss or no weight gain. The most frequent adverse events were gastrointestinal and transient in nature. Lixisenatide provides an easy, once-daily, single-dose, add-on treatment to oral antidiabetic agents or basal insulin for the management of T2DM, with little or no increased risk of hypoglycaemia and a potential beneficial effect on body weight.

Differential effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists on components of dysglycaemia in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Metabolic consequences of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are the result of enhanced glucose-stimulated insulin secretion, inhibition of glucagon release, delayed gastric emptying and increased satiety. These attributes make GLP-1 agonists a treatment option in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). To optimise treatment choice, a detailed understanding of the effects of GLP-1 RAs on glucose homeostasis in individuals with T2DM is necessary. Although the various GLP-1 RAs share the same basic mechanisms of action, differences in pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics translate into differential effects on parameters of glycaemia. Head-to-head comparisons between long-acting non-prandial (liraglutide once daily and exenatide once weekly) and shorter-acting prandial (exenatide twice daily and lixisenatide once daily prandial) GLP-1 RAs confirm their differential effects on fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and post-prandial glucose (PPG). Liraglutide once daily and exenatide once weekly demonstrate greater reductions in FPG but lesser impacts on PPG excursions plasma than exenatide twice daily. Prandial GLP-1 RAs have a profound effect on post-prandial glycaemia, mediated by delaying gastric emptying, which is not subject to the tachyphylaxis occurring due to the sustained elevated plasma GLP-1 concentrations after treatment with long-acting GLP-1 RAs. Lixisenatide once-daily prandial, in contrast to liraglutide, strongly suppresses post-prandial glucagon secretion, further contributing to the more pronounced PPG-lowering effect found with lixisenatide. Evidence suggests that the GLP-1 RAs that predominantly target the prandial glucose excursions, such as exenatide twice daily and lixisenatide once-daily prandial, are therefore best used as combination therapy with basal insulin and will form an important new treatment option for individuals with T2DM.

A comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of insulin detemir and insulin glargine: a single dose clamp study in people with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: The pharmacodynamic properties of a single dose of 0.5 U/kg insulin detemir and insulin glargine were compared during two 24-h isoglycaemic clamps, one week apart. METHODS: The order of treatments was randomised. At approximately 0830 h, persons with T2DM received subcutaneous administration of a 0.5 U/kg dose of either insulin detemir or insulin glargine into the anterior abdominal wall. Plasma glucose was measured at 10-min intervals throughout the 24-h clamp period and isoglycaemia was maintained by variable infusion of 20% glucose. Glucose infusion rates (GIR) and plasma C-peptide were determined throughout each 24-h period. RESULTS: Eleven persons with type 2 diabetes (8 male) with mean (SD) age 58.5 years (8.5), BMI 30.8 kg/m² (2.8) and HbA1c 7.5% (0.6) were studied. Plasma glucose remained constant during the clamp (CV: insulin detemir 3.7%; insulin glargine 3.8%). Following injection of insulin detemir, GIR increased, reaching a mean peak of 2.29 mg/kg/min (95% CI 1.64, 2.94) at 11.6h (range 8.9 to 14.3) compared to 1.71 mg/kg/min (95% CI 1.4, 2.0) at 10.2 h (8.1 to 12.3) for insulin glargine (P=0.025 for GIR(max)). Plasma C-peptide decreased during the study period, remaining significantly lower than the fasting level at the study end after both analogues, insulin detemir (P=0.01) and insulin glargine (P=0.02). CONCLUSION: In persons with T2DM, no difference in duration of action following a single subcutaneous dose of insulin detemir and insulin glargine could be observed. Insulin detemir showed greater between subject variability and achieved a significantly higher maximum GIR than insulin glargine.

Estimates of the relative and absolute diurnal contributions of fasting and post-prandial plasma glucose over a range of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To re-examine the relative and absolute contributions of fasting/pre-prandial glucose (FPG) and post-prandial glucose (PPG) to 24-h hyperglycaemia and HbA1c respectively in non-insulin treated subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 52 T2DM subjects (37 men) had daytime 12h plasma glucose (PG) profiles determined in response to three serial identical test meals commencing at 08 00h with pre-prandial and frequent post-prandial blood samples collected. The overnight PG profile was derived by projecting the 20 00h glucose concentration to the pre-breakfast value at 08 00h. PPG exposure was calculated above fasting/pre-prandial value for each meal. Excess hyperglycaemia was calculated based on a PG>5.5mmol/L with fasting hyperglycaemia being the difference between the two measurements. The subjects were divided into five groups according to the HbA1c (Group 1<7.0%; Group 2: 7.0-<7.5; Group 3: 7.5-<8.0%; Group 4: 8.0-<9.0%; Group 5:≥9.0%). The 24h relative contribution of PPG exposure and fasting hyperglycaemia to excess hyperglycaemia and the absolute contribution of PPG and fasting hyperglycaemia to excess HbA1c (HbA1c - 5.1%) was calculated. RESULTS: With deteriorating glycaemia, the relative contribution of PPG exposure decreased across the groups from 43.5% (HbA1c<7.0%) to 17.8% (HbA1c≥9.0%), whilst the contributions of fasting hyperglycaemia increased from 56.5% to 82.2% (P=0.004), respectively. The absolute contributions of PPG to excess HbA1c was 0.7%, which remained relatively stable across the spectrum of HbA1c, whilst fasting hyperglycaemia increased significantly from groups 1 to 5 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Fasting hyperglycaemia contributes substantially in all groups, increasing as HbA1c deteriorates. The absolute contribution of PPG to excess HbA1c did not vary across the range of HbA1c, representing a significant relative contribution even in well-controlled subjects with a HbA1c<7.0%.

Does feeding by Halyomorpha halys (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) reduce soybean seed quality and yield?

The nonnative brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys Stål (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae), has become an abundant pest of mid-Atlantic soybean since its introduction in the mid-1990s. Currently, there is little information indicating how this new pest should be managed in soybean or if economic thresholds developed for native stink bugs should be adjusted. In 2010 and 2011, field cage studies were conducted in Beltsville, MD, and Suffolk, VA, to evaluate H. halys injury to three different soybean reproductive development stages. Cages were infested for 2 wk using densities of zero, one, two, four, or eight stink bugs (fifth instars and adults) per 0.3 row-m. Cage plots were harvested, and subsamples were taken to determine pod losses and seed quality. Feeding injury to soybean caused by H. halys was similar to that of native stink bugs, as evidenced by seed destruction, punctures, and destroyed pods. Densities of four stink bugs per 0.3 row-m resulted in significant seed damage in three of four experiments. The full flowering (R2) soybean development stage was least affected by H. halys feeding. The full pod (R4) and the full seed (R6) stage were similarly sensitive to injury. There was no significant yield loss was associated with stink bug densities at either location, although there were significant differences among stages in two of four experiments. The data do not indicate that threshold densities for H. halys should be different than for the native stink bugs.

Stepwise intensification of insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes management--exploring the concept of the basal-plus approach in clinical practice.

Basal insulin provides an effective method for initiating insulin therapy in people with Type 2 diabetes, resulting in significant improvements in glycaemic control, lower rates of hypoglycaemia and less weight gain than either prandial or premixed insulin regimens. However, the progressive nature of Type 2 diabetes and the inability of basal insulin to correct excessive postprandial glucose excursions mean that insulin therapy will eventually need to be intensified, typically by adding prandial insulin as part of a basal-bolus or premixed insulin regimen. The aim of this review is to summarize recent clinical evidence for a staged 'basal-plus' strategy for insulin intensification where one, two or three prandial insulin injections are added to basal insulin according to individual need. In the early stages of insulin therapy, most individuals seem to achieve favourable glycaemic control with basal insulin alone, or in combination with a single prandial insulin injection. The addition of a single prandial insulin injection at the largest meal is well tolerated and associated with significant improvements in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)), low rates of hypoglycaemia and limited weight gain. More people achieve recommended HbA(1c) targets with a basal-plus strategy, compared with twice-daily premixed insulin therapy, with lower rates of hypoglycaemia. The data indicate that a step-by-step approach with the basal-plus strategy is a promising alternative method of insulin intensification that allows for individualization of treatment and may delay progression to a full basal-bolus insulin replacement therapy for many individuals.

Modified release terbutaline (SKP1052) for hypoglycaemia prevention: a proof-of-concept study in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: In this randomized, single blind, cross-over study 2.5 mg and 5 mg of the modified-release terbutaline formulation (SKP-1052) were compared with conventional immediate-release terbutaline (IRT, 5 mg) and placebo on overnight blood glucose (BG) and hypoglycaemia in 30 subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Subjects received subcutaneous injections of insulin glargine (individualized doses) before dinner. SKP-1052, IRT or placebo was administered around 21:00 hours. BG and terbutaline concentrations were monitored overnight for 10 h post-dosing. Endpoints comprised of the nadir BG (BGn 0-10 h, primary endpoint), mean overnight BG (BGmean), morning BG (BGmorning) and hypoglycaemia rates as well as pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoints. RESULTS: SKP-1052 delayed release of terbutaline by 2 h [PK-tmax (mean ± SD) 5.0 ± 2.1 h (2.5 mg) and 4.7 ± 1.7 h (5 mg) vs. 2.6 ± 1.3 h with IRT, p < 0.01, respectively]. Compared with placebo, no significant differences were observed for BGn 0-10 h across treatments, but both 5 mg formulations showed less hypoglycaemic events [10 (IRT), 16 (SKP-1052) vs. 33], higher BGmean (120, 114 and 95 mg/dl) and BGmorning (126, 126 and 101 mg/dl, all comparisons p < 0.05 vs. placebo). Numerically higher BG-levels between 3 and 8 h post-dosing were observed with 2.5 mg SKP-1052 vs. placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with IRT SKP-1052 delays release of terbutaline. 2.5 mg SKP-1052 led to numerically higher BG 3 to 8 h post-dose without fasting hyperglycaemia while 5 mg SKP-1052 resulted in fasting hyperglycaemia vs. placebo. Future studies will investigate optimized doses of SKP-1052 for nocturnal hypoglycaemia prevention.

Long-term safety and efficacy of linagliptin as monotherapy or in combination with other oral glucose-lowering agents in 2121 subjects with type 2 diabetes: up to 2 years exposure in 24-week phase III trials followed by a 78-week open-label extension.

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety, tolerability and efficacy of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin given either alone or in combination with other oral glucose-lowering agents in persons with type 2 diabetes. Methods: A 78-week open-label extension study evaluated subjects who participated in one of four preceding 24-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled parent trials and who received linagliptin, linagliptin + metformin, linagliptin + metformin + a sulphonylurea or linagliptin + pioglitazone (all with linagliptin administered orally once daily). Individuals receiving one of these treatments during a previous trial continued the same treatment (n = 1532) for up to a total of 102 weeks, whereas those previously receiving placebo were switched to linagliptin (n = 589). All 2121 participants received at least one dose of the trial medication and were included in the primary safety analysis. Results: In subjects previously receiving active treatment, the glycosylated haemoglobin A(1c) reduction achieved during the 24-week parent trials was sustained through the 78-week extension period (change from baseline to week 102: -0.8%). Drug-related adverse events were experienced by 14.3% of participants. Hypoglycaemia occurred in 13.9% of participants and was similar between those previously receiving treatment (13.6%) and those switching from placebo to linagliptin (14.6%). Hypoglycaemia occurred most frequently with the use of metformin + a sulphonylurea background therapy (11%). Overall, no clinically relevant changes in body weight were observed. Conclusion: Long-term treatment with linagliptin was well tolerated with no change in the safety profile observed during the extension study. Sustained long-term glycaemic control was maintained for up to 102 weeks with either linagliptin monotherapy or linagliptin in combination with other oral glucose-lowering agents.

Paediatric nutrition risk scores in clinical practice: children with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in the use of nutrition risk assessment tools in paediatrics to identify those who need nutrition support. Four non-disease specific screening tools have been developed, although there is a paucity of data on their application in clinical practice and the degree of inter-tool agreement. METHODS: The concurrent validity of four nutrition screening tools [Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP), Screening Tool for Risk On Nutritional status and Growth (STRONGkids), Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) and Simple Paediatric Nutrition Risk Score (PNRS)] was examined in 46 children with inflammatory bowel disease. Degree of malnutrition was determined by anthropometry alone using World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria. RESULTS: There was good agreement between STAMP, STRONGkids and PNRS (kappa > 0.6) but there was only modest agreement between PYMS and the other scores (kappa = 0.3). No children scored low risk with STAMP, STRONGkids or PNRS; however, 23 children scored low risk with PYMS. There was no agreement between the risk tools and the degree of malnutrition based on anthropometric data (kappa < 0.1). Three children had anthropometry consistent with malnutrition and these were all scored high risk. Four children had body mass index SD scores < -2, one of which was scored at low nutrition risk. CONCLUSIONS: The relevance of nutrition screening tools for children with chronic disease is unclear. In addition, there is the potential to under recognise nutritional impairment (and therefore nutritional risk) in children with inflammatory bowel disease.

Preferences of people with diabetes for diabetic retinopathy screening: a discrete choice experiment.

AIMS: The ever-increasing prevalence of diabetes places pressure on the provision of diabetic retinopathy screening services. As the first study of its kind, we aimed to determine preferences for diabetic retinopathy screening in people with diabetes and to examine the trade-offs between frequency of screening and other service attributes. METHODS: A questionnaire including a discrete choice experiment was administered to people (n = 198) attending diabetic retinopathy screening at eight clinics across Wales, United Kingdom. The discrete choice experiment contained eight pairwise choices in which screening provision was described by five attributes: frequency of screening; travel time; results time; ability of screening to detect other changes; and explanation of results. Data were analysed using logistic regression techniques. RESULTS: We gained a response rate of 86.4% from the 198 questionnaires administered at clinics; 160 complete responses were analysed. Respondents valued four out of the five attributes [ability of screening to detect other changes (P = 0.000), explanation of results (P = 0.024), frequency of screening (P = 0.000) and travel time (P = 0.007)]. Results time was insignificant (P = 0.122). Respondents were willing to wait an additional 12, 2 and 1 month between screening tests to have a test that was able to detect additional changes, to have their results explained in person rather than by letter and to have a 15-min reduction in travel time, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents were willing to accept a longer screening interval, as long as preferences for other attributes of service provision (ability of screening to detect other changes, explanation of results and travel time) were made available.

Diabetic retinopathy screening: perspectives of people with diabetes, screening intervals and costs of attending screening.

AIMS: To obtain the views of people with diabetes about the provision of diabetic retinopathy screening services; and the interval of screening. METHODS: Between October 2009 and January 2010, people with diabetes attending diabetic retinopathy screening clinics across Wales were asked to complete a questionnaire comprising of two parts: the first asking about their health, diabetes history, demographic characteristics and views about the diabetic retinopathy screening service, and the second asking about the costs of attending the screening. RESULTS: The response rate was 40% (n = 621) from 1550 questionnaires distributed at diabetic retinopathy clinics, with 600 complete responses analysed. Respondents had a mean known duration of diabetes of 8.5 years (sd 7.8) and had attended for screening on average 3.2 times (sd 1.6) in the last 5 years. Sixty-eight per cent (n = 408) of respondents reported having their eyes screened approximately once a year. Eighty-five per cent (n = 507) felt that they should have their eyes screened every year. However, 65% (n = 390) of respondents would accept screening at 2- or 3-year intervals if medical evidence showed that it was safe. The reported personal costs incurred by respondents attending diabetic retinopathy screening were low. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that people with diabetes undergoing diabetic retinopathy screening would accept a greater screening interval, provided that adequate clinical evidence and medical reassurance were given.