Drug treatment for diabetes in nursing home residents

Digital algorithm-guided insulin therapy in home healthcare for elderly persons with type 2 diabetes: A proof-of-concept study

GlucoTab@MobileCare, a digital workflow and decision support system with integrated basal and basal-plus insulin algorithm was investigated for user acceptance, safety and efficacy in persons with type 2 diabetes receiving home health care by nurses. During a three months study nine participants (five female, age 77 ± 10 years, HbA1c 60 ± 13 mmol/mol (study start) vs. 57 ± 12 mmol/mol (study end) received basal or basal-plus insulin therapy as suggested by the digital system. In total 95% of all suggested tasks (blood glucose (BG) measurements, insulin dose calculations, insulin injections) were performed according to the digital system. Mean morning BG was 171 ± 68 mg/dL in the first study month vs. 145 ± 35 mg/dL in the last study month, indicating a reduced glycemic variability of 33 mg/dL (standard deviation). No hypoglycemic episode < 54 mg/dL occurred. User’s adherence was high and the digital system supported a safe and effective treatment. Larger scale studies are needed to confirm findings under routine care.

German Clinical Trials Register ID

DRKS00015059

Potential Overtreatment and Undertreatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence, outcomes, and factors associated with potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in long-term care facilities (LTCFs).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents with T2DM and aged ≥60 years living in LTCFs.

MEASURES

Articles published between January 2000 and September 2020 were retrieved following a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL plus, and gray literature. Inclusion criteria were the reporting of (1) potential overtreatment and undertreatment quantitatively defined (implicitly or explicitly) based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and/or blood glucose; (2) prevalence, outcomes, and associated factors of potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment; and (3) the study involved residents of LTCFs.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. Prevalence of potential overtreatment (5%-86%, n = 15 studies) and undertreatment (1.4%-35%, n = 8 studies) varied widely among facilities and geographical locations, and according to definitions used. Prevalence of potential overtreatment was 16%-74% when defined as treatment with a glucose-lowering medication in a resident with ≥1 hypoglycemia risk factor or serious comorbidity, together with a HbA1c <7% (n = 10 studies). Potential undertreatment was commonly defined as residents on glucose-lowering medication having HbA1c >8.5% and the prevalence 1.4%-14.8% (n = 6 studies). No studies prospectively measured resident health outcomes from overtreatment and undertreatment. Potential overtreatment was positively associated with use of oral glucose-lowering medications, dementia diagnosis or dementia severity, and/or need for assistance with activities of daily living (n = 2 studies). Negative association was found between potential overtreatment and use of insulin/combined insulin and oral glucose-lowering medication. No studies reported factors associated with potential undertreatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The prevalence of potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment varied widely among residents with T2DM depending on the definition(s) used in each study. Longitudinal studies examining associations between glycemic management and health outcomes, and the use of consensus definitions of overtreatment and undertreatment are required to establish findings about actual glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment in LTCFs.

Diabetes Management According to Health Status in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Staying in Geriatric Care Facilities

BACKGROUND

About 25% of adults >70 years suffer from type 2 diabetes. Due to the heterogeneity of the geriatric population, guidelines emphasize the need to individualize glycemic goals and simplify treatment strategies with the main focus of avoiding hypoglycemia. The aim of this study was to assess glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes in geriatric care facilities based on their individual health status.

METHODS

170 medical records of older adults with type 2 diabetes in geriatric care facilities were retrospectively assessed (64.7% female, age 80 ± 9 years; glycated hemoglobin 6.8% ± 3.6% [51 ± 16 mmol/mol]; body mass index 27.9 ± 5.8 kg/m2). Based on the individual health status, patients were allocated to three groups (healthy n = 27, complex n = 86, and poor n = 57).

RESULTS

The overall blood glucose (BG) value was highest in the poor health group with 188 ± 47 mg/dL (poor) vs 167 ± 42 mg/dL (complex) vs 150 ± 34 mg/dL (healthy). BG values of 1.6% (poor) vs 2.8% (complex) vs 1.5% (healthy) of patients were below 90 mg/dL. 36.8% (poor) vs 23.4% (complex) vs 18.5% (healthy) of patients received insulin as the main diabetes therapy, but of these only 14.3% (poor) vs 20% (complex) vs 40% (healthy) were treated with basal insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, BG values were higher in the poor and complex health group. There were a few low BG values in all groups. Although recommended by international guidelines, basal insulin therapy with its low complexity and low hypoglycemic risk is still underused, especially in the poor health group. Therefore, simplification of diabetes therapy should be considered further.

Study protocol for assessing the user acceptance, safety and efficacy of a tablet-based workflow and decision support system with incorporated basal insulin algorithm for glycaemic management in participants with type 2 diabetes receiving home health care: A single-centre, open-label, uncontrolled proof-of-concept study

Introduction

Diabetes management can be especially complex for older adults who receive health care at home. Thus, international guidelines recommend basal-insulin regimens due to simpler handling and low hypoglycaemia risk. A basal-insulin algorithm (including basal-plus) was developed to also include participant's health status and subsequently implemented into a tablet-based workflow and decision support system, GlucoTab@MobileCare. This study protocol describes a proof-of-concept study to investigate user acceptance, safety and efficacy of the GlucoTab@MobileCare system in participants receiving home health care.

Methods

The open-label, single-centre, uncontrolled study will recruit a maximum of ten participants with insulin treated type-2-diabetes (age ≥18 years) who receive home health care. During a three month study period participants will receive basal- or basal-plus-insulin therapy once daily as suggested by the GlucoTab@MobileCare system. Statistical analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint is the percentage of tasks (BG measurements, insulin dose calculations, insulin injections) that were performed according to GlucoTab@MobileCare suggestions relative to the total of suggested tasks. Secondary endpoints include user acceptance, safety and efficacy parameters. The study was approved by the ethics committee and regulatory authorities. Before obtaining written informed consent, all participants will receive oral and written information about all aspects of the study. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and at diabetes and geriatric conferences.

Discussion

Potential implications may be improved quality and safety of basal-insulin therapy in older adults as well as support for health-care-providers in daily routine including evidence-based knowledge.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00015059);

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

IMPORTANCE

Intensive treatment of older people with diabetes is common placing them at increased risk of adverse events such as hypoglycaemia and hospitalisation for drug errors. Little is known about when, how or for whom to deintensify hypoglycaemic medications.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the characteristics of patients for whom deintensification is appropriate and to determine the outcome of deintensification.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Medline, Google scholar and EmBase search from 1997 to present was performed using keywords relating to diabetes mellitus, polypharmacy, hypoglycaemia, hospitalisation, deintensification, deprescribing and reduction, simplification or withdrawal of hypoglycaemic medications. Only English language articles were selected. Articles were reviewed for relevance by abstract. A manual review of citations in retrieved articles was performed in addition to the electronic literature search.

FINDINGS

Those who are over treated appear to be of older age group, frail with weight loss and have multiple medical morbidities especially renal impairment and dementia. Simplification, reduction or even complete withdrawal of hypoglycaemic medications in these patients appears to be feasible without deterioration of glycaemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

Over treatment is common in frail older people with multiple comorbidities and deintensification appears safe in this group of patients. Current recommendations emphasise preventing underuse rather than overuse of medications, and therefore, a change in guidelines advice may be warranted.

Prevalence of hypoglycemia among diabetic old age home residents in South India

AIM

To assess the prevalence of diabetes among inmates at old age care homes in south India and scrutinize their therapy, glycemic levels and burden of hypoglycemic episodes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medication record based observational study was conducted in 9 old-age care facilities across south India from February to September 2015. The cognitive and functional status were analysed and the prevalence of hypoglycemia estimated. Descriptive analysis was performed using SPSS 18.0 for windows.

RESULTS

The prevalence, predisposing variables and therapeutic modalities used in 189 inmates of 9 old-age homes in Kerala. The mean age of the sample was estimated to be 71.3±3.4 years. 67.2% of the total inmates were found to be diabetic and met the inclusion criteria. Of the total patients, 72.44% had co-existence of both cognitive and functional impairment.86% patients developed hypoglycemia at least at some point during the therapy and insulin was found to be the drug used in majority of patients with the condition indicating that aggressive therapies can increase fatality due to hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Most guidelines call for an individualized therapeutic approach suing less aggressive strategies for patients vulnerable to hypoglycemia and geriatric population form such a substantial group. The current study highlights the necessity for special attention when considering therapeutic regimen among such patients.

Potential glycemic overtreatment in patients ≥75 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus and renal disease: experience from the observational OREDIA study

BACKGROUND

Few data exist examining the management of elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and renal impairment (RI). This observational study assessed the therapeutic management of this fragile population.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study: data from 980 diabetic patients ≥75 years with renal disease are presented.

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 81 years (range 75-101) with long-standing diabetes (15.4 years) often complicated (half with macrovascular disease). Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 43 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 20% had severe RI. Mean hemoglobin A1c was 7.4%. Anti-diabetic therapy was oral based for 51% of patients (60% ≥2 oral anti-diabetic drugs [OAD]) and insulin based for 49% (combined with OAD in 59%). OAD included metformin (47%), sulfonylureas (26%), glinides (19%), and DPP-4 inhibitors (31%). Treatments were adjusted to increasing RI, with less use of metformin, sulfonylureas, and DPP-4 inhibitors, and more glinides and insulin in severe RI. In all, 579 (60%) of these elderly patients with comorbidities had hemoglobin A1c <7.5% (mean 6.7%) while being intensively treated: 69% under insulin-secretagogues and/or insulin, putting them at high risk for severe hypoglycemia. Only one-fourth were under oral monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In clinical practice, a substantial proportion of elderly patients may be overtreated. RI is insufficiently taken into account when prescribing OAD.

Prevalence, Clinical Correlates, and Use of Glucose-Lowering Drugs among Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Living in Long-Term Care Facilities

Prevalence, clinical correlates, and use of glucose-lowering drugs were comprehensively evaluated among 863 nursing home older patients with diabetes (mean age 82.9 ± 2.1 years): functional dependence and cognitive impairment were present in 84.1% and 68% of patients, respectively, and 66.3% of patients had 2-4 comorbidities. HbA1c values < 7.0% were documented in 54.9% of diabetic; significantly lower HbA1c levels were observed in demented patients than in nondemented subjects. Documented hypoglycemic episodes were reported for 57 patients (6.6%), without significant association with age, functional dependence, cognitive impairment, or HbA1c levels. About one-fifth of older long-term facilities residents have diabetes, with concomitant poor health conditions and high prevalence of cognitive impairment and functional dependence. Roughly three-fourths of these older and frail diabetic patients have HbA1c values lower than optimal, suggesting a potential for hypoglycemic harm especially among patients with severe cognitive impairment.

A randomized controlled trial comparing treatment with oral agents and basal insulin in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes in long-term care facilities

BACKGROUND

Managing hyperglycemia and diabetes is challenging in geriatric patients admitted to long-term care (LTC) facilities.

METHODS

This randomized control trial enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with blood glucose (BG) >180 mg/dL or glycated hemoglobin >7.5% to receive low-dose basal insulin (glargine, starting dose 0.1 U/kg/day) or oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) therapy as per primary care provider discretion for 26 weeks. Both groups received supplemental rapid-acting insulin before meals for BG >200 mg/dL. Primary end point was difference in glycemic control as measured by fasting and mean daily glucose concentration between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients (age: 79±8 years, body mass index: 30.1±6.5 kg/m(2), duration of diabetes mellitus: 8.2±5.1 years, randomization BG: 194±97 mg/dL) were randomized to basal insulin (n=75) and OAD therapy (n=75). There were no differences in the mean fasting BG (131±27 mg/dL vs 123±23 mg/dL, p=0.06) between insulin and OAD groups, but patients treated with insulin had greater mean daily BG (163±39 mg/dL vs 138±27 mg/dL, p<0.001) compared to those treated with OADs. There were no differences in the rate of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) between insulin (27%) and OAD (31%) groups, p=0.58. In addition, there were no differences in the number of hospital complications, emergency room visits, and mortality between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this randomized study indicate that elderly patients with T2D in LTC facilities exhibited similar glycemic control, hypoglycemic events and complications when treated with either basal insulin or with oral antidiabetic drugs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01131052.