Deintensification of hypoglycaemic medications-use of a systematic review approach to highlight safety concerns in older people with type 2 diabetes

Prevalence of tight glycemic control based on frailty status and associated factors in community-dwelling older adults

BACKGROUND

Tight control of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in frail older adults has shown to be associated with adverse outcomes. The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence of tight glycemic control based on underlying frailty status and its association with functional and cognitive measures in community-dwelling older adults.

METHODOLOGY

Ancillary study of the Singapore Population Health Studies on older adults aged ≥65 years with T2DM. Tight glycemic control cut-offs were based on the 2019 Endocrine Society guideline using HbA1c target range based on a patient's overall health status measured by the FRAIL scale. Data on basic demographics, frailty, cognitive, and functional statuses were collected. Multivariable regression was used to assess potential factors associated with tight glycemic control.

RESULTS

Of 172 community-dwelling older adults with diabetes mellitus and HbA1c done, frail (65%) and pre-frail (64.4%) participants were more likely to have tight glycemic control than robust participants (31.6%, P < 0.001). In multi-variate analysis, frailty (OR 6.43, 95% CI 1.08-38.1, P = 0.041), better cognition (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.32, P = 0.028), and multi-morbidity (OR 7.36, 95% CI 1.07-50.4, P = 0.042) were found to be significantly associated with increased odds of tight glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

Tight glycemic control was highly prevalent in frail and pre-frail older adults, especially in those with multi-morbidity and better cognition. Future prospective longitudinal studies are required to evaluate effectiveness of frailty screening in making treatment decisions and long-term outcomes. Key messages What is already known on this topic:  There is growing recognition that glycemic targets should be adjusted based on health or frailty status. However, there is no consensus on how health status or frailty should be defined when determining glycemic control targets. What this study adds:  Our study found that tight glycemic control was highly prevalent in frail and pre-frail older adults. Our findings highlight the importance of assessing for tight glycemic control based on frailty status and further work is needed to aid implementation of screening and intervention policies to avoid the attendant harms of tight glycemic control.

Deprescribing: An umbrella review

This umbrella review examined systematic reviews of deprescribing studies by characteristics of intervention, population, medicine, and setting. Clinical and humanistic outcomes, barriers and facilitators, and tools for deprescribing are presented. The Medline database was used. The search was limited to systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in English up to April 2022. Reviews reporting deprescribing were included, while those where depre-scribing was not planned and supervised by a healthcare professional were excluded. A total of 94 systematic reviews (23 meta--analyses) were included. Most explored clinical or humanistic outcomes (70/94, 74 %); less explored attitudes, facilitators, or barriers to deprescribing (17/94, 18 %); few focused on tools (8/94, 8.5 %). Reviews assessing clinical or humanistic outcomes were divided into two groups: reviews with deprescribing intervention trials (39/70, 56 %; 16 reviewing specific deprescribing interventions and 23 broad medication optimisation interventions), and reviews with medication cessation trials (31/70, 44 %). Deprescribing was feasible and resulted in a reduction of inappropriate medications in reviews with deprescribing intervention trials. Complex broad medication optimisation interventions were shown to reduce hospitalisation, falls, and mortality rates. In reviews of medication cessation trials, a higher frequency of adverse drug withdrawal events underscores the importance of prioritizing patient safety and exercising caution when stopping medicines, particularly in patients with clear and appropriate indications.

Clinical inertia in thyrotropin suppressive therapy for low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer: A real-world experience at an endocrine center in Bangkok

The management of low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) has evolved over time toward treatment de-escalation. However, overtreatment with supraphysiological dose of levothyroxine (LT4) continues to be observed despite current clinical guideline. This study aimed to assess the actual thyrotropin suppressive therapy for low-risk DTC patients at an endocrine center in Bangkok. This retrospective study included patients with low-risk DTC who were regularly follow-up for at least 18 months at Theptarin Hospital between 2016 and 2022. The serum thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels were stratified as TSH < 0.1 mIU/L; TSH 0.1 to 0.5 mIU/L; TSH 0.5 to 2.0 mIU/L; and TSH > 2.0 mIU/L. The initial risk stratification (IRS) and dynamic risk stratification were determined at 12 months of follow-up after completing the initial treatment and at the last visit. The clinical factors associated with overtreatment with LT4 were analyzed. A total of 102 patients (83.3% female, age at diagnosis 41.8 ± 13.6 years, mean tumor size 1.6 ± 1.0 cm) were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 5.9 years. The IRS classified 92.2% of patients after the initial treatment and 93.1% of patients at the last follow-up visit into the excellent response category. The mean LT4 daily dosage at the last follow-up was 121.3 ± 44.8 µg/day. Serum TSH levels were in an appropriate target range according to IRS in only 8.8% (9/102) of the patients and then improved to 19.6% (20/102) at the last follow-up visit. Further analysis showed that treating physicians with ≥10 years of practice was associated with severe TSH suppression therapy (TSH < 0.1 mIU/L). Despite the current clinical guideline recommendations and scientific evidences, less than one-fifth of low-risk DTC patients achieved the appropriate serum TSH target. While the proportion of an optimum LT4 suppressive had improved during the study period, further efforts are needed to overcome this clinical inertia.

[Impact of a primary care pharmacy unit on the optimization of pharmacological treatment of type 2 diabetic patients]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a pharmaceutical intervention on treatment optimization in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DESIGN

Before-after intervention study. SITE: Health centers of the Primary Care Department of Camp de Tarragona.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥ 18 years, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus and under treatment with antidiabetic drugs.

INTERVENTIONS

Review of pharmacological treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus and issuance of proposals for its adequacy.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Demographic and clinical variables were collected to assess the adequacy of antidiabetic treatment. A consensus meeting was arranged with the patients' primary care physician to evaluate the proposals for improvement. The implementation of the proposals and the variation in postintervention glycemic control were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 907 patients (59% men) were included. A total of 782 proposals for intervention were made in 65.8% of the patients reviewed. Of the proposals, 43.5% corresponded to drug discontinuation, 16% to intensification of dosing and 12.6% to exchange for a therapeutic equivalent. Of the consensual proposals, 54.7% were implemented. HbA1c was reduced by 0.2% after the intervention (7.4 vs 7.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Review of the pharmacological treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by a pharmacist or pharmacologist facilitates its optimization.

Deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with type 2 diabetes: Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial (D-MED study)

AIMS

Amongst elderly people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) over prescribing can result in emergency ambulance call-outs, falls and fractures and increased mortality, particularly in frail patients. Current clinical guidelines, however, remain focused on medication intensification rather than deintensification where appropriate. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an electronic decision-support system and training for the deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with T2D, when compared to 'usual' care at 12-months.

METHODS

This study is an open-label, multi-site, two-armed pragmatic cluster-randomised trial. GP practices randomised to the 'enhanced care' group have an electronic decision support system installed and receive training on the tool and de-intensification of diabetes medications. The system flags eligible patients for possible deintensification of diabetes medications, linking the health care professional to a clinical algorithm. The primary outcome will be the number of patients at 12-months who have had potentially inappropriate diabetes medications de-intensified.

RESULTS

Study recruitment commenced in June 2022. Data collection commenced in January 2023. Baseline data have been extracted from 40 practices (3145 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital technology, involving computer decision systems, may have the potential to reduce inappropriate medications and aid the process of de-intensification.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN53221378. Available at: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN53221378.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Essential steps in primary care management of older people with Type 2 diabetes: an executive summary on behalf of the European geriatric medicine society (EuGMS) and the European diabetes working party for older people (EDWPOP) collaboration

We present an executive summary of a guideline for management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in primary care written by the European Geriatric Medicine Society, the European Diabetes Working Party for Older People with contributions from primary care practitioners and participation of a patient's advocate. This consensus document relies where possible on evidence-based recommendations and expert opinions in the fields where evidences are lacking. The full text includes 4 parts: a general strategy based on comprehensive assessment to enhance quality and individualised care plan, treatments decision guidance, management of complications, and care in case of special conditions. Screening for frailty and cognitive impairment is recommended as well as a comprehensive assessment all health conditions are concerned, including end of life situations. The full text is available online at the following address: essential_steps_inprimary_care_in_older_people_with_diabetes_-_EuGMS-EDWPOP___3_.pdf.

Clinical impacts of frailty on 123,172 people with diabetes mellitus considering the age of onset and drugs of choice: a nationwide population-based 10-year trajectory analysis

AIMS

Frailty substantially increased the risk of adverse clinical outcomes, which was also critical in diabetes management. This study aimed to investigate the interrelationships between the age of onset, frailty, anti-diabetic medications and clinical outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

A total of 123,172 people aged 40 years and older who were newly diagnosed with DM were identified and categorised into four frailty subgroups (robust, mild, moderate and severe) based on the multimorbidity frailty index (mFI). Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations between frailty and clinical outcomes at different ages of DM onsets (40-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ years). Outcomes of interest included generic outcomes (mortality and unplanned hospitalisation) and DM-related outcomes (cardiovascular disease-related mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), diabetes-related hospitalisation and hypoglycaemia).

RESULTS

The proportion of frailty increased with age at diagnosis amongst people with incident DM and the mFI scores increased significantly during the 10-year follow-up. Amongst people with diabetes, those with mild, moderate and severe frailty were associated with greater risks of all-cause mortality (mild: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.60-1.80], P < 0.01; moderate: aHR 2.46 [2.29-2.65], P < 0.01; severe frailty: aHR 3.40 [3.16-3.65], P < 0.01) compared with the robust group. Similar results were found in unplanned hospitalisations, cardiovascular disease-related mortality, MACEs and hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study quantified the prevalence of frailty, captured its dynamic changes and examined its impacts on various clinical outcomes amongst people with diabetes at different ages at onset. Frailty assessment and management should be implemented into routine diabetes care.

Pharmacist-led intervention aimed at deprescribing and appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication among people with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Potential overtreatment with cardiometabolic medication (i.e., glucose lowering medication, antihypertensives and statins) has been observed in 10-40% of older people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

OBJECTIVE

The potential effects of a pharmacist-led clinical medication review targeted at T2D patients who were at high risk of hypoglycaemia will be investigated.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted in 14 Dutch community pharmacies. Patients with a high risk of hypoglycaemia were identified using a previously developed algorithm. Pharmacists confirmed eligibility and selected patients for the intervention. Remaining eligible patients were included as controls receiving usual care. The primary outcome was the proportion of intervention patients for whom an action on deprescribing or appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication was implemented. After three months, changes in cardiometabolic medication were compared between the intervention and control group using a Fischer exact test.

RESULTS

In total 90 intervention patients and 107 control patients were included. Intervention patients had an average age of 70, used on average 10 medications, five of which were cardiometabolic medication. For half of the intervention patients an action on deprescribing cardiometabolic medication was implemented (n = 25) and/or an advice about appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication was given (n = 22). In 48% of intervention patients at least one cardiometabolic medication (e.g. insulin, sulfonylurea, diuretic, beta-blocker, statin) was either stopped or reduced in dose compared to 31% of control patients (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

A pharmacist-led tailored clinical medication review has the potential to increase deprescribing and improve appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication in half of T2D patients at high risk of hypoglycaemia.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

One-year safety and efficacy results of insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the sustained safety and efficacy of insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in patients with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1c ≤ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) during a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

Seventy-two adults with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1c ≤ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) participated in the trial (age 63.8 ± 9.5 years, HbA1c 6.4 ± 0.7%, [46 ± 8 mmol/mol] body weight 92.95 ± 18.83 kg, total daily insulin dose: 43.21 ± 10.80 units; mean ± SD). Previous insulins were stopped, and once daily IDegLira was started. IDegLira was titrated by the patients to achieve a self-measured prebreakfast plasma glucose concentration of ≥5 mmol/L to ≤6 mmol/L.

RESULTS

After 12 months, good glycaemic control was maintained, while body weight decreased significantly. Mean HbA1c changed to 6.2 ± 0.8% (44 ± 9 mmol/mol) (p = .109) and body weight changed by -3.89 kg to 89.06 ± 18.61 kg (p < .0001). The simplified treatment was safe and well-tolerated. Percentage of patients experiencing at least one episode of hypoglycaemia was 49% during the month before simplification and 17% during the last 3 months of the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in selected patients with type 2 diabetes is safe, maintains adequate glycaemic control and is associated with weight loss over 12 months.

Evaluation of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 Control in Home-Based Primary Care Patients Managed by Clinical Pharmacy Specialists

Purpose To evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led diabetes care in a Home-Based Primary Care (HBPC) setting. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort chart review in HBPC veterans with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DMII) at Columbia VA Health Care System. A sample size of 80 patients was calculated to meet power of 80% and a P-value of less than 0.05 was used to determine clinical significance. The primary outcome was mean hemoglobin A1C (HgbA1C) change after up to 18 months of Clinical Pharmacy Specialist (CPS) diabetes-led care stratified by baseline HgbA1C. Secondary outcomes included change in the number of diabetes medications and doses per day stratified by baseline HgbA1C. Results One hundred twelve patients were included in the final analysis based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean absolute HgbA1C reduction was 0.51%, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.82 from 8.1% at baseline. For the subgroup analyses, patients with baseline HgbA1C less than 8.5%, had a nonsignificant increase in their HgbA1C, while patients with HgbA1C 8.5% or more showed significant reductions in HgbA1C (P < 0.05). Patients with baseline HgbA1C less than 6.5% had a significant decrease of 0.52, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.87 and patients with baseline HgbA1C 6.5% or more had a nonsignificant increase in the number of diabetes medications (P > 0.05). Patients with baseline HgbA1C of less than 7.5% and 9.5% or more had a decrease in the number of diabetes medication doses with results being significant for patients with HgbA1C less than 6.5%, 95% CI -0.58 to -1.89. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that HBPC CPSs are improving glycemic control in HBPC veterans while simplifying diabetic regimens with attention to hypoglycemic risk reduction.

A retrospective study of diabetes treatment in older adults: what should we AIM for?

OBJECTIVES

Management of diabetes in elderly individuals requires a complex approach, considering the negative consequences. Glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment are relatively common conditions among this population. This study aimed to determine the potential overtreatment and undertreatment frequencies in older adults and the factors associated with these conditions.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 405 diabetic older adults aged >65 years. Sociodemographic characteristics, additional comorbidities, medications, HbA1c and fasting glucose levels of the patients have been recorded.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 71 years. The frequency of potential overtreatment and undertreatment has been found to be 20.2% and 17.8%, respectively. Insulin and sulfonylureas were found to be associated with increased risk of potential overtreatment (p = 0.000, OR = 14.91 and p = 0.000, OR = 8.48, respectively) and reduced risk of potential undertreatment (p = 0.001, OR = 0.16 and p = 0.000, OR = 0.05, respectively), while DPP-4 inhibitors were found to be associated with reduced risk of potential undertreatment (p = 0.000, OR = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

Our study has shown that potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment are common problems in diabetic older adults. It was found that agents with a high risk of hypoglycemia, such as insulin and sulfonylureas, were more closely associated with potential overtreatment. In the management of diabetes in the elderly, it should be aimed to choose treatment agents that lead to less negative consequences and to follow up the patients more closely.

Expert Panel Guidance and Narrative Review of Treatment Simplification of Complex Insulin Regimens to Improve Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

Given the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes (T2D), most individuals with the disease will ultimately undergo treatment intensification. This usually involves the stepwise addition of a new glucose-lowering agent or switching to a more complex insulin regimen. However, complex treatment regimens can result in an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and high treatment burden, which may impact negatively on both therapeutic adherence and overall quality of life. Individuals with good glycaemic control may also be overtreated with unnecessarily complex regimens. Treatment simplification aims to reduce individual treatment burden, without compromising therapeutic effectiveness or safety. Despite data showing that simplifying therapy can achieve good glycaemic control without negatively impacting on treatment efficacy or safety, it is not always implemented in clinical practice. Current clinical guidelines focus on treatment intensification, rather than simplification. Where simplification is recommended, clear guidance is lacking and mostly focused on treatment of the elderly. An expert, multidisciplinary panel evaluated the current treatment landscape with respect to guidance, published evidence, recommendations and approaches regarding simplification of complex insulin regimens. This article outlines the benefits of treatment simplification and provides practical recommendations on simplifying complex insulin treatment strategies in people with T2D using illustrative cases.

Motivation for Treatment Correlating Most Strongly with an Increase in Satisfaction with Type 2 Diabetes Treatment

INTRODUCTION

We previously reported several factors that cross-sectionally correlate with treatment satisfaction in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes visiting diabetes clinics. The aim of this study is to identify factors associated with longitudinal changes in treatment satisfaction in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

The study included 649 patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral glucose-lowering agents who completed the first questionnaire in 2016. The collected data included scores from the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and other parameters regarding diabetes treatment. We analyzed 1-year longitudinal changes in DTSQ scores and investigated factors associated with these changes.

RESULTS

Univariate linear regression analyses showed that changes in body weight, adherence to diet therapy, adherence to exercise therapy, cost burden, motivation for treatment, regularity of mealtimes, and perceived hypoglycemia correlated with changes in DTSQ scores. On the basis of multiple linear regression analyses, a decrease in hypoglycemia (β ± SE = - 0.394 ± 0.134, p = 0.0034), cost burden (β ± SE = - 0.934 ± 0.389, p = 0.017), and an increase in treatment motivation (β ± SE = 1.621 ± 0.606, p = 0.0077) correlated with DTSQ score increases, suggesting that motivation for treatment had the strongest impact on score increases. Subgroup analyses revealed that an increase in motivation for treatment most significantly correlated with a DTSQ score increase in obese and poor glycemic control groups, regardless of age.

CONCLUSION

This is the first longitudinal study clarifying that an increase in motivation for treatment most strongly correlates with an increase in DTSQ score in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Using an Electronic Health Record and Deficit Accumulation to Pragmatically Identify Candidates for Optimal Prescribing in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Despite guidelines recommending less stringent glycemic goals for older adults with type 2 diabetes, overtreatment is prevalent. Pragmatic approaches for prioritizing patients for optimal prescribing are lacking. We describe glycemic control and medication patterns for older adults with type 2 diabetes in a contemporary cohort, exploring variability by frailty status.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study based on electronic health record (EHR) data, within an accountable care organization (ACO) affiliated with an academic medical center/health system. Participants were ACO-enrolled adults with type 2 diabetes who were ≥65 years of age as of 1 November 2020. Frailty status was determined by an automated EHR-based frailty index (eFI). Diabetes management was described by the most recent A1C in the past 2 years and use of higher-risk medications (insulin and/or sulfonylurea).

RESULTS

Among 16,973 older adults with type 2 diabetes (mean age 75.2 years, 9,154 women [53.9%], 77.8% White), 9,134 (53.8%) and 6,218 (36.6%) were classified as pre-frail (0.10 < eFI ≤0.21) or frail (eFI >0.21), respectively. The median A1C level was 6.7% (50 mmol/mol) with an interquartile range of 6.2-7.5%, and 74.1 and 38.3% of patients had an A1C <7.5% (58 mmol/mol) and <6.5% (48 mmol/mol), respectively. Frailty status was not associated with level of glycemic control (P = 0.08). A majority of frail patients had an A1C <7.5% (58 mmol/mol) (n = 4,544, 73.1%), and among these patients, 1,755 (38.6%) were taking insulin and/or a sulfonylurea.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with insulin and/or a sulfonylurea to an A1C levels <7.5% is common in frail older adults. Tools such as the eFI may offer a scalable approach to targeting optimal prescribing interventions.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Defining Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions for Hypoglycaemic Agents to Improve Computerised Decision Support: A Study Protocol

In France, around 5% of the general population are taking drug treatments for diabetes mellitus (mainly type 2 diabetes mellitus, T2DM). Although the management of T2DM has become more complex, most of these patients are managed by their general practitioner and not a diabetologist for their antidiabetics treatments; this increases the risk of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) of hypoglycaemic agents (HAs). Inappropriate prescribing can be assessed by approaches that are implicit (expert judgement based) or explicit (criterion based). In a mixed, multistep process, we first systematically reviewed the published definitions of PIPs for HAs in patients with T2DM. The results will be used to create the first list of explicit definitions. Next, we will complete the definitions identified in the systematic review by conducting a qualitative study with two focus groups of experts in the prescription of HAs. Lastly, a Delphi survey will then be used to build consensus among participants; the results will be validated in consensus meetings. We developed a method for determining explicit definitions of PIPs for HAs in patients with T2DM. The resulting explicit definitions could be easily integrated into computerised decision support tools for the automated detection of PIPs.

Older people's attitudes towards deprescribing cardiometabolic medication

BACKGROUND

Overtreatment with cardiometabolic medication in older patients can lead to major adverse events. Timely deprescribing of these medications is therefore essential. Self-reported willingness to stop medication is usually high among older people, still overtreatment with cardiometabolic medication is common and deprescribing is rarely initiated. An important barrier for deprescribing reported by general practitioners is the patients' unwillingness to stop the medication. More insights are needed into the influence of patients' characteristics on their attitudes towards deprescribing and differences in these attitudes between cardiometabolic medication groups.

METHODS

A survey in older people using cardiometabolic medication using the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire was performed. Participants completed the general rPATD and an adapted version for four medication groups. Linear and ordinal logistic regression were used to assess the influence of age, sex, therapeutic area and number of medications used on the patients' general attitudes towards deprescribing. Univariate analysis was used to compare differences in deprescribing attitudes towards sulfonylureas, insulins, antihypertensive medication and statins.

RESULTS

Overall, 314 out of 1143 invited participants completed the survey (median age 76 years, 54% female). Most participants (80%) were satisfied with their medication and willing to stop medications if their doctor said it was possible (88%). Age, sex and therapeutic area had no influence on the general attitudes towards deprescribing. Taking more than ten medicines was significantly associated with a higher perceived medication burden. Antihypertensive medication and insulin were considered more appropriate than statins, and insulin was considered more appropriate than sulfonylureas not favouring deprescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of older people using cardiometabolic medication are willing to stop one of their medicines if their doctor said it was possible. Health care providers should take into account that patients perceive some of their medication as more appropriate than other medication when discussing deprescribing.

Diabetes and Frailty: An Expert Consensus Statement on the Management of Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Prognosis and appropriate treatment goals for older adults with diabetes vary greatly according to frailty. It is now recognised that changes may be needed to diabetes management in some older people. Whilst there is clear guidance on the evaluation of frailty and subsequent target setting for people living with frailty, there remains a lack of formal guidance for healthcare professionals in how to achieve these targets. The management of older adults with type 2 diabetes is complicated by comorbidities, shortened life expectancy and exaggerated consequences of adverse effects from treatment. In particular, older adults are more prone to hypoglycaemia and are more vulnerable to its consequences, including falls, fractures, hospitalisation, cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Thus, assessment of frailty should be a routine component of a diabetes review for all older adults, and glycaemic targets and therapeutic choices should be modified accordingly. Evidence suggests that over-treatment of older adults with type 2 diabetes is common, with many having had their regimens intensified over preceding years when they were in better health, or during more recent acute hospital admissions when their blood glucose levels might have been atypically high, and nutritional intake may vary. In addition, assistance in taking medications, as often occurs in later life following implementation of community care strategies or admittance to a care home, may dramatically improve treatment adherence, leading to a fall in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. As a person with diabetes gets older, simplification, switching or de-escalation of the therapeutic regimen may be necessary, depending on their level of frailty and HbA1c levels. Consideration should be given, in particular, to de-escalation of therapies that may induce hypoglycaemia, such as sulphonylureas and shorter-acting insulins. We discuss the use of available glucose-lowering therapies in older adults and recommend simple glycaemic management algorithms according to their level of frailty.

Rates, determinants and success of implementing deprescribing in people with type 2 diabetes: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Individualizing goals for people with type 2 diabetes may result in deintensification of medication, but a comprehensive picture of deprescribing practices is lacking.

AIMS

To conduct a scoping review in order to assess the rates, determinants and success of implementing deprescribing of glucose-, blood pressure- or lipid-lowering medications in people with diabetes.

METHODS

A systematic search on MEDLINE and Embase between January 2007 and January 2019 was carried out for deprescribing studies among people with diabetes. Outcomes were rates of deprescribing related to participant characteristics, the determinants and success of deprescribing, and its implementation. Critical appraisal was conducted using predefined tools.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included; eight reported on rates, nine on determinants and six on success and implementation. Bias was high for studies on success of deprescribing. Deprescribing rates ranged from 14% to 27% in older people with low HbA_1c levels, and from 16% to 19% in older people with low systolic blood pressure. Rates were not much affected by age, gender, frailty or life expectancy. Rates were higher when a reminder system was used to identify people with hypoglycaemia, which led to less overtreatment and fewer hypoglycaemic events. Most healthcare professionals accepted the concept of deprescribing but differed on when to conduct it. Deprescribing glucose-lowering medications could be successfully conducted in 62% to 75% of participants with small rises in HbA_1c .

CONCLUSIONS

Deprescribing of glucose-lowering medications seems feasible and acceptable, but was not widely implemented in the covered period. Support systems may enhance deprescribing. More studies on deprescribing blood pressure- and lipid-lowering medications in people with diabetes are needed.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Deprescription in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

The Primary aim is to verify physicians' adherence to the 2016 Italian diabetes guidelines therapeutic targets, and their habits on deprescription in elderly persons with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). Secondary aims are the assessment of the potential impact of the targets' changes in 2018 Italian guidelines, and the outcomes of deprescription in the management of T2DM.

METHODS

Observational retrospective cohort study, enrolling persons with T2DM, aged > 75 years, who attended a visit throughout 2017, and a second visit 6 months later in our outpatient clinic.

RESULTS

Of the 387 patients included, 336 (87, 8%) were on target, according to 2016 guidelines. Deprescription was advisable in 62% of patients on target. Among those, 22% were deprescribed. In patients undergoing deprescription, during the following 6 months, no severe hypoglycemia occurred (versus 5 cases in the prior 6 months). Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) increased (p < 0.05) from 47.0 [41.7-51.0] to 53.0 [45.4-59.5] mmol/mol). Applying to the sample the 2018 Italian Guidelines targets, 57.2% would have been on target, 18.5% above, and 24.3% below (needing deprescription).

CONCLUSION

In our study, a minority of suitable patients received deprescription. Deprescription led to a significant reduction in severe hypoglycemia rate, whereas HbA1c remained on target in the majority of cases.

Challenges and Strategies for Diabetes Management in Community-Living Older Adults

The prevalence of diabetes is increasing, especially in older people, mainly because of an increase in life expectancy. The number of comorbidities also increases with increasing age, leading to a unique diabetes phenotype in old age that includes vascular disease, physical and neuropathic complications, and mental dysfunction. These three categories of complications appear to have a synergistic effect that can lead to a vicious cycle of deterioration into disability. Early assessment and appropriate, timely interventions may delay adverse outcomes. However, this complex phenotype constitutes a great challenge for health care professionals. This article reviews the complex diabetes phenotype in old age and explores management strategies that are predominantly based on the overall functional status of patients within this heterogeneous age-group.

Type 2 diabetes and cognitive dysfunction-towards effective management of both comorbidities

Type 2 diabetes and cognitive dysfunction are highly prevalent disorders worldwide. Although type 2 diabetes is associated with an increased risk of dementia, awareness of the link between the two conditions is poor, and few recommendations are available to guide clinicians about how to approach cognitive dysfunction in people with diabetes. Clinical guidelines in diabetes have only recently begun to emphasise the importance of cognitive impairment in diabetes and its management. This Series paper aims to synthesise knowledge about the link between diabetes and cognitive dysfunction, issues pertaining to screening and diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia in those with type 2 diabetes, management of diabetes in people with cognitive dysfunction (accounting for age and frailty), and emerging therapies for prevention. A conceptual framework for approaching screening and diagnosis is included, and future research directions to guide the field forward are suggested.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus in frail elderly patients

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus is expected to rise in the frail elderly population, which will have significant consequences for the health economy. Symptoms of hypoglycaemia can be subtle in the elderly. Hypoglycaemia accounts for more hospital admissions than hyperglycaemia. Treatment targets are set based on the risk of adverse events resulting from treatment and the benefits expected from tighter glycaemic control. The different medications available are discussed including the different types of insulin, in particular relation to usage in older adults. The choice of therapy is based on the targets, comorbidities and the characteristics of each antidiabetic agent. Deintensification of therapy should be considered in patients who experience adverse effects. Treatment guidelines should be formulated based on the above principles, as many current guidelines do not incorporate deintensification of therapy.

Preventable adverse drug events: Descriptive epidemiology

AIM

Our objective was to identify preventable adverse drug events and factors contributing to their development.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review combining data from three prospective multicentre observational studies that assessed emergency department patients for adverse drug events. A clinical pharmacist and physician independently reviewed the charts, extracted data and rated the preventability of each adverse drug event. A third reviewer adjudicated all discordant or uncertain cases. We calculated the proportion of adverse drug events that were deemed preventable, performed multivariable logistic regression to explore the characteristics of patients with preventable events, and identified contributing factors.

RESULTS

We reviewed the records of 1 356 adverse drug events in 1 234 patients. Raters considered 869 (64.1%) of adverse drug events probably or definitely preventable. Patients with mental health diagnoses (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3-2.5) and diabetes (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.4) were more likely to present with preventable events. The medications most commonly implicated in preventable events were warfarin (9.4%), hydrochlorothiazide (4.5%), furosemide (4.0%), insulin (3.9%) and acetylsalicylic acid (2.7%). Common contributing factors included inadequate patient instructions, monitoring and follow-up, and reassessments after medication changes had been made.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that patients with mental health conditions and diabetes require close monitoring. Efforts to address the identified contributing factors are needed.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Deprescribing: Polypharmacy management in older adults with comorbidities

In today's clinical landscape, the simultaneous use of multiple drugs to treat a single condition has become a major patient safety issue. Recent evidence suggests a need to identify deprescribing opportunities in the management of polypharmacy. NPs, as clinical gatekeepers, are in a key position to spearhead deprescribing best practices, specifically as they relate to older adults with multiple medication regimens.

Simplifying Complex Insulin Regimens While Preserving Good Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetic patients suffering from severe hyperglycemia are often assigned a regimen involving multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin. If the glucose toxicity resolves, the regimen can potentially be simplified, but there are no guidelines for this, and many patients are left on the MDI regimen. We aimed to prospectively examine the safety and efficacy of switching from MDI to once-daily IDegLira, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide, in relatively well controlled (HbA1c ≤ 7.5%) subjects with type 2 diabetes on a low total daily insulin dose (TDD).

METHODS

62 adults with type 2 diabetes (baseline age 64.06 ± 10.24 years, HbA_1c 6.42 ± 0.68%, BMI 33.53 ± 6.90 kg/m², body weight 93.81 ± 19.26 kg, TDD 43.31 ± 10.99 IU/day, insulin requirement 0.47 ± 0.13 IU/kg, duration of diabetes 10.84 ± 7.50 years, mean ± SD) treated with MDI ± metformin were enrolled in our study. Previous insulins were stopped and once-daily IDegLira was started. IDegLira was titrated by the patients to achieve a self-measured pre-breakfast blood glucose concentration of < 6 mmol/L.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up period of 99.2 days, mean HbA_1c had decreased by 0.30% to 6.12 ± 0.65% (p < 0.0001), body weight had decreased by 3.11 kg to 90.70 ± 19.12 kg (p < 0.0001), and BMI had reduced to 32.39 ± 6.71 kg/m² (p < 0.0001). After 3 months of treatment, the mean dose of IDegLira was 20.76 ± 6.60 units and the mean insulin requirement had decreased to 0.23 ± 0.08 IU/kg. IDegLira ± metformin combination therapy was found to be safe and generally well tolerated. During the month before the baseline visit, 28 patients (45%) had at least one episode of documented or symptomatic hypoglycemia, while only 6 (9.67%) patients reported a total of 13 documented episodes during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In everyday clinical practice, switching from low-dose MDI to IDegLira in patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes is safe, may result in weight loss and similar or better glycemic control, and substantially reduces the insulin requirement. Simplifying complex treatment regimens decreases treatment burden and may improve adherence to therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT04020445.

Factors influencing safe glucose-lowering in older adults with type 2 diabetes: A PeRsOn-centred ApproaCh To IndiVidualisEd (PROACTIVE) Glycemic Goals for older people: A position statement of Primary Care Diabetes Europe

Diabetes in later life is associated with a range of factors increasing the complexity of glycaemic management. This position statement, developed from an extensive literature review of the subject area, represents a consensus opinion of primary care clinicians and diabetes specialists. It highlights many challenges facing older people living with type 2 diabetes and aims to support primary care clinicians in advocating a comprehensive, holistic approach. It emphasises the importance of the wishes of the individual and their carers when determining glycaemic goals, as well as the need to balance intended benefits of treatment against the risk of adverse treatment effects. Its ultimate aim is to promote consistent high-quality care for older people with diabetes.

Evidence-based diabetes care for older people with Type 2 diabetes: a critical review

In our ageing society diabetes imposes a significant burden in terms of the numbers of people with the condition, diabetes-related complications including disability, and health and social care expenditure. Older people with diabetes can represent some of the more complex and difficult challenges facing the clinician working in different settings, and the recognition that we have only a relatively small (but increasing) evidence base to guide us in diabetes management is a limitation of our current approaches. Nevertheless, in this review we attempt to explore what evidence there is to guide us in a comprehensive scheme of treatment for older adults, often in a high-risk clinical state, in terms of glucose lowering, blood pressure and lipid management, frailty care and lifestyle interventions. We strive towards individualized care and make a call for action for more high-quality research using different trial designs.

Diabetes and Aging: From Treatment Goals to Pharmacologic Therapy

Diabetes is becoming one of the most widespread health burning problems in the elderly. Worldwide prevalence of diabetes among subjects over 65 years was 123 million in 2017, a number that is expected to double in 2045. Old patients with diabetes have a higher risk of common geriatric syndromes, including frailty, cognitive impairment and dementia, urinary incontinence, traumatic falls and fractures, disability, side effects of polypharmacy, which have an important impact on quality of life and may interfere with anti-diabetic treatment. Because of all these factors, clinical management of type 2 diabetes in elderly patients currently represents a real challenge for the physician. Actually, the optimal glycemic target to achieve for elderly diabetic patients is still a matter of debate. The American Diabetes Association suggests a HbA1c goal <7.5% for older adults with intact cognitive and functional status, whereas, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) recommends HbA1c levels of 6.5% or lower as long as it can be achieved safely, with a less stringent target (>6.5%) for patients with concurrent serious illness and at high risk of hypoglycemia. By contrast, the American College of Physicians (ACP) suggests more conservative goals (HbA1c levels between 7 and 8%) for most older patients, and a less intense pharmacotherapy, when HbA1C levels are ≤6.5%. Management of glycemic goals and antihyperglycemic treatment has to be individualized in accordance to medical history and comorbidities, giving preference to drugs that are associated with low risk of hypoglycemia. Antihyperglycemic agents considered safe and effective for type 2 diabetic older patients include: metformin (the first-line agent), pioglitazone, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Insulin secretagogue agents have to be used with caution because of their significant hypoglycemic risk; if used, short-acting sulfonylureas, as gliclazide, or glinides as repaglinide, should be preferred. When using complex insulin regimen in old people with diabetes, attention should be paid for the risk of hypoglycemia. In this paper we aim to review and discuss the best glycemic targets as well as the best treatment choices for older people with type 2 diabetes based on current international guidelines.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2019

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Glycaemic control and mortality in older people with type 2 diabetes: The Fremantle Diabetes Study Phase II

AIM

To investigate whether tight glycaemic control achieved with metformin, insulin or sulphonylurea-based pharmacotherapy increases all-cause mortality in older people with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of individuals with known diabetes recruited between 2008 and 2011 and followed until 2016. The impact of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) on mortality hazards was investigated in participants aged ≥75 years. Proportional hazards models for time to death were constructed from the baseline clinical assessment, then the variables of interest (HbA1c, treatment category and their interactions) were entered.

RESULTS

There were 367 participants (mean age 80.1 ± 3.9 years, median [interquartile range] HbA1c 50 [45-56] mmol/mol or 6.7 [6.3-7.3]%) who were followed for a median (interquartile range) 6.7 (4.5-7.7) years, during which 40.9% of the participants died. At baseline, 60.4% were on metformin-based treatment, 35.3% on sulphonylurea-based treatment and 23.2% on treatment including insulin. Baseline HbA1c was significantly associated with mortality in a model that included interactions between HbA1c and the three treatment-based groups compared with non-pharmacological treatment. The metformin treatment group had higher mortality when HbA1c levels were <48 mmol/mol (<6.5%) and the sulphonylurea and insulin treatment groups had higher mortality when HbA1c levels were <52 mmol/mol (<7.0%), with hazard ratios of 2.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-4.97), 2.49 (95% CI 1.14-5.44) and 2.22 (95% CI 1.12-4.43), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Tight glycaemic control may be hazardous in older people with type 2 diabetes when achieved with pharmacotherapy with metformin, and especially with insulin or sulphonylureas. These data confirm that overtreatment is likely to be an important clinical problem in this vulnerable population.