scholarly journals Current status of oral antidiabetic drug prescribing patterns based on the body mass index for Japanese type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and yearly changes in diabetologists’ prescribing patterns from 2002 to 2019 (JDDMXX)

Author(s):  
Noriharu Yagi ◽  
Ichiro Komiya ◽  
Keiko Arai ◽  
Mariko Oishi ◽  
Yoshihide Fukumoto ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 530-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun ◽  
Marijn de Bruin ◽  
Laurence Guillaumie ◽  
Jocelyne Moisan ◽  
Jean-Pierre Grégoire ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e001361
Author(s):  
Daisuke Yabe ◽  
Hiroko Higashiyama ◽  
Takashi Kadowaki ◽  
Hideki Origasa ◽  
Iichiro Shimomura ◽  
...  

IntroductionTo investigate factors affecting glycemic control, oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) treatment distribution and self-care activities among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who newly initiate OAD monotherapy in a real-world setting in Japan.Research design and methodsA Real-world Observational Study on Patient Outcomes in Diabetes (RESPOND) is an ongoing, prospective, observational cohort study with follow-up at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Primary objectives include OAD treatment patterns (cross-sectional and longitudinal) among diabetes specialists versus non-specialists; adherence to diabetes self-care activities; quality of life; treatment satisfaction among patients and target attainment rates of parameters, including glycated hemoglobin. Here, we present the study design and baseline data.ResultsOf 1506 patients enrolled (June 2016–May 2017; 174 sites in Japan), 1485 were included in the baseline analysis (617 treated by specialists, 868 by non-specialists). Most patients were prescribed dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4Is) (specialist vs non-specialist, 54.1% vs 57.1%), then sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (13.9% vs 22.2%), metformin (20.3% vs 12.9%) and other OADs (<5% individually in both groups). Regardless of age, body mass index and glycated hemoglobin, DPP-4Is were the most commonly prescribed OADs by both specialists and non-specialists. About one-fifth and one-third of patients visiting specialists and non-specialists, respectively, received no advice on diet and exercise. The proportion of patients following self-care recommendations for diet and exercise (2/5 items on the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities) was significantly higher among those visiting specialists than non-specialists.ConclusionThe use of newer OAD was common across a broad range of clinical characteristics in patients with T2DM who newly initiated monotherapy in Japan. However, patient-related and physician-related factors could affect the treatment changes during the following course of treatment. In addition, treatment outcome could vary with the observed difference in the level of patient education provided by diabetes specialists versus non-specialists.


Author(s):  
Hariballav Mahapatra ◽  
Laxminarayan Mahapatra ◽  
Monalisa Khuntia ◽  
Abhay Kumar Sahoo ◽  
Soumya Sucharita

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document