Assessment of clinical inertia in people with diabetes within primary care

Exploring disparities: A comparative analysis of insulin-naïve, regular users, and inertia patients among type 2 diabetes mellitus outpatients in India

Introduction

Insulin utilization pattern varies greatly in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Clinical inertia in treatment intensification hinders glycemic control in T2DM management. This study investigated insulin prescription trends and various predictors among insulin naive, user, and insulin inertia (II) patients in T2DM.

Methodology

A retrospective analysis of T2DM patient records from the diabetes clinic at a tertiary care center was conducted. Data on socio-demographics, anthropometry, disease characteristics, comorbidities, adherence, and medication prescribing patterns were collected. Analysis was done using tests of significance, odds ratio (OR), and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

A total of 950 records were analyzed, with 17.3% of patients identified as insulin users (IU), 70.9% being insulin-naïve (IN), and 11.8% having II. IUs had significantly higher glycemic levels including HbA1c, fasting, postprandial, and random blood sugars compared to the other groups. Higher HbA1c levels were associated with significantly increased odds of insulin usage (OR: 3.46, confidence interval (CI): 1.94-6.16), while individuals taking sulfonylureas had lower odds of insulin usage (OR: 0.27, CI: 0.08-0.91). A significant association was also seen with the total number of oral antidiabetic drugs prescribed (four drugs; OR: 15.6, and five drugs; OR: 9.1). Other factors did not show a significant association. The regression model showed HbA1c level as low as 7.9% could indicate a future insulin requirement in 22% of patients.

Conclusion

The study outlines differences in characteristics and parameters among T2DM patients who require or do not require insulin and highlights the challenges in insulin initiation in Indian T2DM patients. Findings on II underscore the need for timely treatment intensification.

Roadmap to the Effective Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Primary Care

Diabetes technology has undergone a remarkable evolution in the past decade, with dramatic improvements in accuracy and ease of use. Continuous glucose monitor (CGM) technology, in particular, has evolved, and coevolved with widely available consumer smartphone technology, to provide a unique opportunity to both improve management and decrease the burden of management for populations across nearly the entire spectrum of people living with diabetes. Capitalizing on that opportunity, however, will require both adoption of and adaptations to the use of CGM technology in the broader world of primary care. This article focuses on mechanisms to expand pathways to optimized glycemic management, thereby creating a robust roadway capable of improving care across broad populations managed in primary care settings. Recent expansions in access to devices combined with improved mechanisms for data access at the time of primary care visits and improved training and evolving systems of support within primary care, hold potential to improve glycemic management in diabetes across the health care spectrum.

Clinical Inertia in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review

This review seeks to establish, through the recent available literature, the prevalence of therapeutic intensification delay and its sequences in poorly controlled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients. The strategy identified studies exploring the clinical inertia and its associated factors in the treatment of patients with T2DM. A total of 25 studies meeting the pre-established quality criteria were included in this review. These studies were conducted between 2004 and 2021 and represented 575,067 patients diagnosed with T2DM. Trusted electronic bibliographic databases, including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were used to collect studies by utilizing a comprehensive set of search terms to identify Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms. Most o the studies included in this review showed clinical inertia rates over 50% of T2DM patients. In the USA, clinical inertia ranged from 35.4% to 85.8%. In the UK, clinical inertia ranged from 22.1% to 69.1%. In Spain, clinical inertia ranged from 18.1% to 60%. In Canada, Brazil, and Thailand, clinical inertia was reported as 65.8%, 68%, and 68.4%, respectively. The highest clinical inertia was reported in the USA (85.8%). A significant number of patients with T2DM suffered from poor glycemic control for quite a long time before treatment intensification with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) or insulin. Barriers to treatment intensification exist at the provider, patient, and system levels. There are deficiencies pointed out by this review at specialized centers in terms of clinical inertia in the management of T2DM including in developed countries. This review shows that the earlier intensification in the T2DM treatment is appropriate to address issues around therapeutic inertia.

Changes in clinical markers observed from pharmacist-managed cardiovascular risk reduction clinics in federally qualified health centers: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Reductions in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C) have been associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes and savings in medical expenditures. One public health approach has involved pharmacists within primary care settings. The objective was to assess change in HbA1C from baseline after 3-5 months of follow up in pharmacist-managed cardiovascular risk reduction (CVRR) clinics.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort chart review occurred in eight pharmacist-managed CVRR federally qualified health clinics (FQHC) in Indiana, United States. Data were collected from patients seen by a CVRR pharmacist within the timeframe of January 1, 2015 through February 28, 2020. Data collected include: demographic characteristics and clinical markers between baseline and follow-up. HbA1C from baseline after 3 to 5 months was assessed with pared t-tests analysis. Other clinical variables were assessed and additional analysis were performed at 6-8 months. Additional results are reported between 9 months and 36 months of follow up.

RESULTS

The primary outcome evaluation included 445 patients. Over 36 months of evaluation, 3,803 encounters were described. Compared to baseline, HbA1C was reduced by 1.6% (95%CI -1.8, -1.4, p<0.01) after 3-5 months of CVRR care. Reductions in HbA1C persisted at 6-8 months with a reduction of 1.8% ([95%CI -2.0, -1.5] p<0.01). The follow-up losses were 29.5% at 3-5 months and 93.2% at 33-36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study augments the existing literature by demonstrating the health improvement of pharmacist-managed CVRR clinics. The great proportion of loss to follow-up is a limitation of this study to be considered. Additional studies exploring the expansion of similar models may amplify the public health impact of pharmacist-managed CVRR services in primary care sites.

Intensifying approaches to address clinical inertia among cardiovascular disease risk factors: A narrative review

OBJECTIVE

Clinical inertia, the absence of treatment initiation or intensification for patients not achieving evidence-based therapeutic goals, is a primary contributor to poor clinical outcomes. Effectively combating clinical inertia requires coordinated action on the part of multiple representatives including patients, clinicians, health systems, and the pharmaceutical industry. Despite intervention attempts by these representatives, barriers to overcoming clinical inertia in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor control remain.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative literature review to identify individual-level and multifactorial interventions that have been successful in addressing clinical inertia.

RESULTS

Effective interventions included dynamic forms of patient and clinician education, monitoring of real-time patient data to facilitate shared decision-making, or a combination of these approaches. Based on findings, we describe three possible multi-level approaches to counter clinical inertia - a collaborative approach to clinician training, use of a population health manager, and use of electronic monitoring and reminder devices.

CONCLUSION

To reduce clinical inertia and achieve optimal CVD risk factor control, interventions should consider the role of multiple representatives, be feasible for implementation in healthcare systems, and be flexible for an individual patient's adherence needs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Representatives (e.g., patients, clinicians, health systems, and the pharmaceutical industry) could consider approaches to identify and monitor non-adherence to address clinical inertia.

Time to Treatment Intensification to Reduce Diabetes-Related Complications: A Post Hoc Study

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be affected by clinical inertia, leading to abysmal results. Studies on a suitable timeframe for treatment intensification remain scarce—especially outside of developed countries. This study aimed to explore the association between time to treatment intensification and diabetes-related complications. A database from a tertiary care hospital in Thailand was retrieved in order to conduct a retrospective cohort study for the years 2011–2017. This study comprised outpatients with T2DM presenting an HbA1c of ≥7.0%. Eligible patients were divided into three groups based on the time of treatment intensification: no delayed treatment intensification, treatment intensification within 6 months, and treatment intensification after 6 months. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate the association between time to treatment intensification and diabetes-related complications. A total of 686 patients were included in the final analysis. During 6.5 years of median follow-up, the group with treatment intensification within 6 months was more strongly associated with diabetic nephropathy compared to the group with no delayed treatment intensification (adjusted HR 2.35; 95%CI 1.35–4.09). Our findings reveal that delaying treatment intensification by even 6 months can increase the likelihood of diabetic nephropathy compared to no delayed treatment intensification. We suggest that patients with T2DM whose blood glucose levels are outside the target range promptly receive treatment intensification.

Less Timely Initiation of Glucose-Lowering Medication Among Younger and Male Patients With Diabetes and Similar Initiation of Blood Pressure-Lowering Medication Across Age and Sex: Trends Between 2015 and 2020

Aims: We aimed to assess trends in glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) thresholds at initiation of glucose- and blood pressure-lowering medication among patients with type 2 diabetes and assess the influence of age and sex on these trends. Materials and Methods: We used the Groningen Initiative to ANalyze Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) primary care database. Patients initiating a first non-insulin glucose-lowering or any blood pressure-lowering medication between 2015 and 2020 with an HbA1c or SBP measurement in the 120 days before initiation were included. We used multilevel regression analyses adjusted for potential confounders to assess the influence of calendar year, age or sex, and the interaction between calendar year and age or sex on trends in HbA1c and SBP thresholds at initiation of medication. Results: We included 2,671 and 2,128 patients in the analyses of HbA1c and SBP thresholds, respectively. The overall mean HbA1c threshold at initiation of glucose-lowering medication significantly increased from 7.4% in 2015 to 8.0% in 2020 (p < 0.001), and particularly in the younger age groups. Compared to patients ≥80 years, patients aged 60-69 years initiated medication at lower levels mainly in the early years. Patients <60 years and between 70-79 years initiated medication at similar levels as patients ≥80 years. Females initiated medication at lower levels than males throughout the study period (p < 0.001). The mean SBP threshold at initiation of blood pressure-lowering medication varied from 145 to 149 mmHg without a clear trend (p = 0.676). There were no differences in SBP thresholds between patients of different ages or sex. Conclusion: The rising trend in the HbA1c threshold for initiating glucose-lowering medication in the lower age groups was unexpected and requires further investigation. Males appear to receive less timely initiation of glucose-lowering medication than females. The lack of higher thresholds for the oldest age group or lower thresholds for the youngest age group in recent years is not in line with the age-related recommendations for personalized diabetes care and calls for health systems interventions.

Measurement of Pharmacist-Physician Collaborative Care on Therapeutic Inertia in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Team-based care practice models have been shown to improve diabetes-related therapeutic inertia, yet the method and type of antidiabetic treatment intensification (TI) leading to improvements in glycemic control are not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate time to TI in a pharmacist-physician practice model (PPM) as compared with usual medical care (UMC), explore the method and type of antidiabetic TI, and evaluate achievement of hemoglobin A_1C (A1C) goal among each cohort.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018. Median time to TI was calculated and compared between patients in the PPM and UMC groups using the log rank test. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the method and type of TI and A1C goal achievement.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients were included. The median (interquartile range) time to antidiabetic TI among the PPM cohort was 37.5 days (8, 216.5), as compared with 142 days (16, 465) in the UMC cohort (P = 0.19). At 1 year post-index date, 25% of patients in the PPM cohort reached their A1C goal compared with 18.8% of patients in the UMC cohort. This effect was maintained in the subgroup (n = 49) of patients receiving TI (23.1% vs 17.8%).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

A shorter time to TI and improvement in A1C goal achievement was observed with pharmacist-physician care compared with UMC. These findings suggest that pharmacist-physician care may be one of several interventions necessary to overcome therapeutic inertia in diabetes care.