Large discrepancy in glycaemic control appropriateness in geriatric patients with type 2 diabetes according to major clinical practice guidelines

Author(s):  
Antoine Christiaens ◽  
Séverine Henrard ◽  
Benoit Boland
2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii1-ii4
Author(s):  
A Christiaens ◽  
B Boland ◽  
S Henrard

Abstract Introduction An individualised glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) target according to the patients’ health status is central in the glycaemic management of geriatric people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in order to avoid hypoglycaemic events through an appropriate management of the glucose-lowering therapy (GLT). Current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide different recommendations for patients’ HbA1c targets. Using real-life data from geriatric patients, this study aimed at assessing the concordance in interpretation of HbA1c values according to three current major CPGs from the Diabetes Canada-2018 (DC18), the Endocrine Society-2019 (ES19) and the American Diabetes Association-2020 (ADA20). Introduction Retrospective study in consecutive older patients (≥75 years) with T2D admitted to a Belgian geriatric ward, with GLT before admission and HbA1c measurement during the hospital stay. Patients were classified into three categories of HbA1c values according to the CPGs recommendations: in-target HbA1c (appropriate-GLT), too-low HbA1c (GLT-overtreatment) and too-high HbA1c (GLT-undertreatment). Concordance of health status classifications and GLT categories between the three CPGs was assessed using Cohen’s and Fleiss’ κ, respectively. Results Of the 318 patients (median age 84 years, 54% women), one-third were in intermediate health and two-thirds in poor health (κ = 0.86; excellent concordance). According to the DC18, ES19 and ADA20 CPGs, HbA1c was in-target for respectively 46%, 25% and 82% of the patients, and too-low HbA1c (GLT-overtreatment) was present in 28%, 57% and 0% (κ = 0.36; low concordance). Results Patients’ HbA1c values are interpreted differently according to these major CPGs, mainly because of differences in their recommendations about HbA1c target individualisation and specifically the definition of a too-low HbA1c value. In clinical practice, these diverging interpretations regarding overtreatment may lead to unsafe GLT prescribing and thereby to hypoglycaemic events in this high-risk population.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Diab ◽  
Huda A. Barhoosh ◽  
Balqis Daoudi ◽  
Sawsan I. AlMukdad ◽  
Nancy HA. Zaghloul ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mee Kyoung Kim ◽  
Seung-Hyun Ko ◽  
Bo-Yeon Kim ◽  
Eun Seok Kang ◽  
Junghyun Noh ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S134
Author(s):  
S. Aceituno ◽  
J. Franch-Nadal ◽  
F. García - Gollarte ◽  
A. Pérez del Molino ◽  
M.L. Orera - Peña ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e58625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haley K. Holmer ◽  
Lauren A. Ogden ◽  
Brittany U. Burda ◽  
Susan L. Norris

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 342-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludovic Casanova ◽  
Aurélie Bocquier ◽  
Sébastien Cortaredona ◽  
Stève Nauleau ◽  
Laurent Sauze ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung-Hyun Ko ◽  
Dong-Joon Kim ◽  
Seung-Joon Oh ◽  
Hye-Jin Lee ◽  
Kang-Hee Shim ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document