Family physician clinical inertia in glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes

Evaluation of the knowledge and practice of family physicians in the management of diabetes mellitus type 2 in Iran

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence and occurrence of type 2 diabetes has made it a widespread epidemic. Being the first line of care, family doctors can play an essential role in this field. The knowledge of these doctors about how to deal with the prevention, diagnosis, and correct treatment of patients is fundamental in reducing the burden of this disease in the community. In this study, we decided to evaluate the knowledge and practice of family doctors in Shiraz-Iran and its related factors in managing Diabetes.

METHOD

This analytical cross-sectional study was conducted among family doctors of two primary healthcare centers, Shahadai Wal-Fajr Health Center and the Enghlab Health Center in Shiraz, Iran, from March 2021 to August 2021. A researcher-designed diabetes questionnaire consisting of 21 items and a data collection form including demographic information and other related factors was used in this study. An interviewer asked the questions from participants at their workplace and completed the questionnaires. The data were analyzed by SPSS-20 software. A linear regression test was used to investigate the factors affecting the questionnaire score. A one-way ANOVA test was used to compare questionnaire scores among multiple groups.

RESULTS

On average, the participants obtained 62.5% of the total score. The average scores for each question in the screening, the diagnosis, and the treatment sections were 0.5 ± 0.28, 0.65 ± 0.2, and 0.66 ± 0.17, respectively. Physicians' knowledge about the blood sugar threshold for diagnosing Diabetes was suboptimal, and 81.9, 47, 43 correctly mentioned the FBS, 2hrpp BS, and HbA1c threshold, respectively. Although 95% knew the first line medication but 33.6% prescribed 2nd or 3rd medication for DM treatment. Only 43% knew the goal of therapy. Sixty-three doctors (42%) have not registered any referrals for newly diagnosed uncomplicated diabetic patients, and 37.6% referred these new DM cases to an internist or endocrinologist at the first visit. Microvascular complication screening, such as testing for microalbuminuria and ophthalmologist consultation reported by 32. 89% and 8% of physicians, respectively. Years since graduation was the determining factor of the knowledge level of doctors in this study. Regarding the preferred education method, most participants selected the workshop method as the preferred training method. Virtual education was ranked as the second preferred educational method.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge and practice of general family doctors were lower than the optimal level in diabetes screening, diagnosis, and treatment. In the treatment of patients, the knowledge of most of the physicians was appropriate in the early stages of treatment, such as determining the time to start the medication and the first line of treatment, but in the follow-up and more advanced treatment, the knowledge and performance of the doctors were less than expected. They prefer to refer patients to higher levels in the healthcare system. Recently graduated physicians had better knowledge and approach to DM management. Therefore, effective periodic training should be conducted as soon as possible to address this pitfall and improve the quality of care. Workshops and virtual education were the most preferred education methods from the participants' points of view. So, it is suggested that these methods be used as the first training methods. Implementing the specialty training program for family medicine (which has been started in our country for a few years) is the best final solution. In addition, A clinical guideline should be designed for family physicians highlighting these physicians' roles in the management of Diabetes.

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.

Prevalence and Associated Factors of Delayed Diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective: To determine the prevalence and associated factors of delayed diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) among outpatients in a tertiary hospital.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted among outpatients aged ≥35 years with twice fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels ≥126 mg/dl between 1 January 2018, and 31 December 2020. The prevalence and pattern of delayed diagnosis of DM were defined using the Thai Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Diabetes, 2017, and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) 2017. The cut-off time for FPG level confirmation of 3 months was used to evaluate delayed diagnoses and associated factors. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with delayed diagnoses.

Results: Of 260 participants, 96.9% and 85.4% had delayed diagnoses as defined by the Thai CPG and the ADA, respectively. Factors significantly associated with delayed diagnosis were hypertension, non-cash insurance, and >10 years of physician experience.

Conclusion: Undiagnosed diabetes and diagnosis delay should be a concern in tertiary settings. Senior physicians should focus on patients with higher FPG levels, particularly those who have hypertension, and use non-cash insurance schemes.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Initiation of Injectable Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Mixed Methods Study

INTRODUCTION

Initiation of injectable therapies in type 2 diabetes (T2D) is often delayed, however the reasons why are not fully understood.

METHODS

A mixed methods study performed in sequential phases. Phase 1: focus groups with people with T2D (injectable naïve [n = 12] and experienced [n = 5]) and healthcare professionals (HCPs; nurses [n = 5] and general practitioners (GPs) [n = 7]) to understand their perceptions of factors affecting initiation of injectables. Phase 2: video-captured GP consultations (n = 18) with actor-portrayed patient scenarios requiring T2D treatment escalation to observe the initiation in the clinical setting. Phase 3: HCP surveys (n = 87) to explore external validity of the themes identified in a larger sample.

RESULTS

Focus groups identified patients' barriers to initiation; fear, lack of knowledge and misconceptions about diabetes and treatment aims, concerns regarding lifestyle restrictions and social stigma, and feelings of failure. Facilitators included education, good communication, clinician support and competence. HCP barriers included concerns about weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and limited consultation time. In simulated consultations, GPs performed high-quality consultations and recognised the need for injectable initiation in 9/12 consultations where this was the expert recommended option but did not provide support for initiation themselves. Survey results demonstrated HCPs believe injectable initiation should be performed in primary care, although many practitioners reported inability to do so or difficulty in maintaining skills.

CONCLUSION

People with T2D have varied concerns and educational needs regarding injectables. GPs recognise the need to initiate injectables but lack practical skills and time to address patient concerns and provide education. Primary care nurses also report difficulties in maintaining these skills. Primary care HCPs initiating injectables require additional training to provide practical demonstrations, patient education and how to identify and address concerns. These skills should be concentrated in the hands of a small number of primary care providers to ensure they can maintain their skills.

Role of therapeutic inertia in glycemic control according to individualized objectives in a cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes. Results from CONCARDIA2

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic inertia (TI) is the lack of initiation or intensification of treatment when indicated. It contributes to the fact that more than a third of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) do not have adequate metabolic control. We set out to analyze the impact of TI during 4 years of follow-up in a cohort of T2D and its possible variables.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study of a cohort of 297 TD2 patients. We considered TI when treatment was not modified during the 4 years, despite poor control. We contemplate uncontrolled those that did not meet their individualized HbA1c target.

RESULTS

Uncontrolled patients: 87; age: 62.2 ± 9.2; 58.7% men. We consider TI in 41.6% of the patients. Average HbA1c 8.22% in patients with treatment intensification of which 43.1% achieved their HbA1c goal, 29.8% were on monotherapy at the beginning, 29.8% double, 36.2% triple and 2,1% in quadruple therapy. There was more change in treatment in people with obesity (67.6 vs. 34.6%; P < 0.01) and the 6 of the study patients with cardiovascular events (P < 0.05). Metformin was part of the treatment in 97.1% of IT cases (vs. 76.6%; P < 0.01). Achievement of the HbA1c target was higher in patients receiving iSGLT2 (0 vs. 68.4%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In 2 out of 5 uncontrolled T2D patients, the treatment was not changed; this was more evident in those patients treated with metformin. Patients with obesity and presence of cardiovascular events seem to protect against IT. Those who were on iSGLT2 have an advantage in meeting their HbA1c target.

Predictors of Clinical Inertia and Type 2 Diabetes: Assessment of Primary Care Physicians and Their Patients

With the growing prevalence and complex pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes, many patients fail to achieve treatment goals despite guidelines and possibilities for treatment individualization. One of the identified root causes of this failure is clinical inertia. We explored this phenomenon, its possible predictors, and groups of patients affected the most, together with offering potential paths for intervention. Our research was a cross-sectional study conducted during 2021 involving 52 physicians and 543 patients of primary healthcare institutions in Belgrade, Serbia. The research instruments were questionnaires based on similar studies, used to collect information related to the factors that contribute to developing clinical inertia originating in both physicians and patients. In 224 patients (41.3%), clinical inertia was identified in patients with poor overall health condition, long diabetes duration, and comorbidities. Studying the changes made to the treatment, most patients (53%) had their treatment adjustment more than a year ago, with 19.3% of patients changing over the previous six months. Moreover, we found significant inertia in the treatment of patients using modern insulin analogues. Referral to secondary healthcare institutions reduced the emergence of inertia. This assessment of primary care physicians and their patients pointed to the high presence of clinical inertia, with an overall health condition, comorbidities, diabetes duration, current treatment, last treatment change, glycosylated hemoglobin and fasting glucose measuring frequency, BMI, patient referral, diet adjustment, and physician education being significant predictors.

Expert Opinion: A Call for Basal Insulin Titration in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Daily Practice: Southeast European Perspective

Therapeutic inertia related to insulin treatment, i.e. delays in initiation, especially titration of basal insulin, is a significant problem in daily practice in Southeast European countries. This phenomenon can be traced back to several patient-, physician- and health system-related factors. In recognition of the issue of inadequate insulin titration, 11 leading experts from countries in this region held a consensus-seeking meeting to review the current status of insulin initiation after non-insulin treatment and the potential barriers to insulin titration to provide an algorithm and tools for outpatient physicians and for patients aimed at optimizing basal insulin titration. The experts reached a consensus on the majority of the topics and proposed recommendations on how clinical inertia can be overcome. The outcomes of the meeting have been summarized in this paper.

Total and partial clinical inertia of general physicians with type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Central Bosnia Canton

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to determine the frequency and predictive factors of partial (PCI) and total clinical inertia (TCI) of general physicians (GPs) in Central Bosnia Canton in the care of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A longitudinal study was conducted with a prospective data collection. Total of 541 subjects of over 40 years of age with type 2 diabetes mellitus of both genders were included in the study. Total of 532 subjects completed the study. Questionnaires for physicians and patients and the Perceived Stress Scale were used, as well as anthropometric measurements and measurements of the glucose level in plasma, HbA1c, triglycerides, AST, ALT, creatinine and eGFR, which were examined on the day of study entry, after 6 months and after one year.

RESULTS

TCI was 5.8% and PCI was 25.6%. Patients with poorly regulated glycaemia and elevated triglyceride levels had the highest probability of PCI and TCI. Patients with an unaccomplished targeted level of blood pressure were more likely to experience PCI. Patients treated by both an internist and a general physician were more likely to have TCI as compared to patients treated only by an internist.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with poor glycemic control experience PCI and TCI more often. In our study, referring to a diabetologist was observed as a non-inert procedure, which resulted in lower PCI and TCI, compared to studies where clinical inertia was defined only as non-intensification of medication therapy.

The Role of Physician and Practice Characteristics in the Quality of Diabetes Management in Primary Care: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence-based guidelines, high-quality diabetes care is not always achieved. Identifying factors associated with the quality of management in primary care may inform service improvements, facilitating the tailoring of quality improvement interventions to practice needs and resources.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science from January 1990 to March 2019. Eligible studies were cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and randomised controlled trials (baseline data) conducted among adults with diabetes, which examined the relationship between any physician and/or practice factors and any objective measure(s) of quality. Studies which examined patient factors only were ineligible. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 82 studies were included. The range of individual quality measures and the construction of composite measures varied considerably. Female physicians compared with males ((odds ratio (OR) = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.10), 8 studies), physicians with higher diabetes volume compared with lower volume (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05-1.47, 4 studies) and practices with Electronic Health Records (EHR) versus practices without (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.11-1.84, 4 studies) were associated with a higher quality of care. There was no association between physician experience, practice location and type of practice and quality. Based on the narrative synthesis, increasing physician age and higher practice socio-economic deprivation may be associated with lower quality of care.

DISCUSSION

Identification of physician- and practice-level factors associated with the quality of care (female gender, younger age, physician-level diabetes volume, practice deprivation and EHR use) may explain differences across practices and physicians, provide potential targets for quality improvement interventions and indicate which practices need specific supports to deliver improvements in diabetes care.

Supporting care for suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus in general practice with a clinical decision support system: a mixed methods pilot cluster randomised trial

OBJECTIVES

We developed a complex intervention called DECIDE (ComputeriseD dECisIonal support for suboptimally controlleD typE 2 Diabetes mellitus in Irish General Practice) which used a clinical decision support system to address clinical inertia and support general practitioner (GP) intensification of treatment for adults with suboptimally controlled type2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The current study explored the feasibility and potential impact of DECIDE.

DESIGN

A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Conducted in 14 practices in Irish General Practice.

PARTICIPANTS

The DECIDE intervention was targeted at GPs. They applied DECIDE to patients with suboptimally controlled T2DM, defined as a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥70 mmol/mol and/or blood pressure ≥150/95 mmHg.

INTERVENTION

The intervention incorporated training and a web-based clinical decision support system which supported; (i) medication intensification actions; and (ii) non-pharmacological actions to support care. Control practices delivered usual care.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility and acceptability was determined using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with GPs, combined with data from the DECIDE website. Clinical outcomes included HbA1c, medication intensification, blood pressure and lipids.

RESULTS

We recruited 14 practices and 134 patients. At 4-month follow-up, all practices and 114 patients were followed up. GPs reported finding decision support helpful navigating increasingly complex medication algorithms. However, the majority of GPs believed that the target patient group had poor engagement with GP and hospital services for a range of reasons. At follow-up, there was no difference in glycaemic control (-3.6 mmol/mol (95% CI -11.2 to 4.0)) between intervention and control groups or in secondary outcomes including, blood pressure, total cholesterol, medication intensification or utilisation of services. Continuation criteria supported proceeding to a definitive randomised trial with some modifications.

CONCLUSION

The DECIDE study was feasible and acceptable to GPs but wider impacts on glycaemic and blood pressure control need to be considered for this patient population going forward.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN69498919.

Clinical inertia is the enemy of therapeutic success in the management of diabetes and its complications: a narrative literature review

Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease characterized by high social, economic and health burden, mostly due to the high incidence and morbidity of diabetes complications. Numerous studies have shown that optimizing metabolic control may reduce the risk of micro and macrovascular complications related to the disease, and the algorithms suggest that an appropriate and timely step of care intensification should be proposed after 3 months from the failure to achieve metabolic goals. Nonetheless, many population studies show that glycemic control in diabetic patients is often inadequate. The phenomenon of clinical inertia in diabetology, defined as the failure to start a therapy or its intensification/de-intensification when appropriate, has been studied for almost 20 years, and it is not limited to diabetes care, but also affects other specialties. In the present manuscript, we have documented the issue of inertia in its complexity, assessing its dimensions, its epidemiological weight, and its burden over the effectiveness of care. Our main goal is the identification of the causes of clinical inertia in diabetology, and the quantification of its social and health-related consequences through the adoption of appropriate indicators, in an effort to advance possible solutions and proposals to fight and possibly overcome clinical inertia, thus improving health outcomes and quality of care.

Titration of insulin glargine 100 U/mL when added to oral antidiabetic drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes: results of the TOP-1 real-world study

AIMS

Adequate insulin titration is crucial for optimal glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to explore the factors and outcomes associated with titration of glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in patients uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) and initiating insulin therapy.

METHODS

Patients from the Titration and Optimization (TOP)-1 registry were stratified by the magnitude of Gla-100 up-titration during the first month (no [< 1 Units (U)/day (d)], minimal [≥ 1 and < 5 U/d], moderate [≥ 5 and ≤ 8 U/d] and strong [> 8 U/d]). The primary endpoint was a fasting blood glucose (FBG) ≤ 110 mg/dL on ≥ 2 occasions and/or individual HbA1c target by 12 months.

RESULTS

Of 2308 patients, 905, 715, 409 and 279 underwent no, minimal, moderate and strong titration, respectively. Age decreased across increasing titration groups (p = 0.02) while body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.0001), FBG (p < 0.0001), and HbA1c (p < 0.0001) increased. At 12 months, the proportions of patients achieving the primary endpoint were comparable across groups (66.1% overall), though a smaller proportion of no titration patients met both their individual HbA1c target and FBG ≤ 110 mg/dL compared to moderate and strong titration patients (20.1% vs. 27.2% and 26.2%, p = 0.033 and 0.023, respectively). HbA1c was also comparable, though FBG was higher in the no titration group (126.2 vs. 122.6, 121.5 and 120.9 mg/dL, p < 0.02). A similar, small reduction in body weight occurred in all groups; hypoglycaemia rates were comparable across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world, titration of Gla-100 during the first month appears to coincide with a number of baseline factors. Insulin dose to meet HbA1c and FBG targets remains suboptimal in the majority of T2D patients.

High level of clinical inertia in insulin initiation in type 2 diabetes across Central and South-Eastern Europe: insights from SITIP study

AIMS

Little is known regarding initiation of insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Central and South-Eastern European countries. Therefore, we conducted a survey to characterise the prescribing practices of specialist diabetes healthcare professionals in this region and assessed factors that influence clinical decision-making regarding insulin initiation in T2D.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey sampled 211 specialist diabetes healthcare prescribers from five Central and South-Eastern European countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, and Slovenia). A structured questionnaire was developed which surveyed current clinical practices and influencing factors, barriers to insulin initiation, and combination therapy prescribing preferences.

RESULT

Only 9.4% (20 of out of 211 respondents) of healthcare professionals would initiate insulin therapy in T2D patients at the recommended HbA1c threshold of 7-7.9% [53-63 mmol/mol]. Large regional differences were evident in insulin initiation thresholds (≥ 9.0% [≥ 75 mmol/mol]: Bulgaria 80.8% vs. Slovenia 13.3%). Psychological distress was recorded as the major barrier to insulin initiation. Health insurance regulations were ranked more important than personal clinical experience and clinical guidelines in clinical decision-making. Information from peers was more influential than manufacturer information, clinical experience, and continuous medical education, respectively, for insulin initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite large regional variation, there is widespread delay of insulin initiation from specialist diabetes healthcare professionals in Central and South-Eastern Europe.

Intensification to injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes: mixed methods study (protocol)

BACKGROUND

In the UK, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is largely managed in primary care. Delay in the intensification to injectable therapy, a form of clinical inertia, is associated with worse glycaemic control. UK general practice is highly computerised, with care being recorded on computerised medical record systems; this allows for quantitative analysis of clinical care but not of the underpinning decision-making process. The aim of this study is to investigate perceptions of patients and clinicians in primary care on the initiation of injectable therapies in T2D, and the context within which those decisions are made.

METHODS

This is a mixed methods study, taking a "realist evaluation" approach. The qualitative components comprise focus groups, interviews, and video recordings of simulated surgeries; the quantitative analysis: an overview of participating practices, elements of the video recording, and an online survey. We will recruit primary care clinicians (general practitioners and nurses) and patients from a representative sample of practices within the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) network. Participants will be patients with T2D, and primary care clinicians. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. The simulated surgeries will include cases that might be escalated to injectable therapy. The consultation will be reviewed using the Calgary-Cambridge model to assess communication and determination of adherence to national prescribing guidelines. We will conduct multi-channel video recording including screen capture, clinician and patient facial expressions, wide angle view of the consultation, and the computerised medical record screen. This allows annotation and qualitative analysis of the video recordings, and statistical analyses for the quantitative data. We will also conduct an online survey of primary care clinicians' attitudes to, and perceptions of, initiation of injectable therapies, which will be analysed using summary statistics.

DISCUSSION

Results aim to provide a detailed insight into the dynamic two-way decision-making process underpinning use of injectable therapy for T2D. The study will provide insights into clinical practice and enable the development of training, interventions and guidelines that may facilitate, where appropriate, the intensification to injectable therapy.

Clinical Inertia in Type 2 Diabetes Patients in Primary Health Care Clinics in Central Bosnia

BACKGROUND The goal of this research was to determine the frequency of clinical inertia of general practice physicians in the region of Central Bosnia in healthcare for type 2 diabetes patients, to analyze characteristics of patients and physicians, as well as glucose regulation during clinical inertia, and, on the basis of these indicators, give recommendations for reducing clinical inertia. MATERIAL AND METHODS This study included 29 doctors, family physicians, or general practitioners, who collected data in a total sample of 541 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients from July to November 2017. The research was conducted using 2 questionnaires. The glucose concentration in plasma and the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were determined. Concertation of cholesterol, triglycerides, AST, and ALT were also measured. After the collection, new data were processed and the degree of clinical inertia was determined. RESULTS Levels of HbA1c ranged from 4.3% to 13.0%, and 38.4% of all patients had HbA1c level higher than 7.5%, while 8.3% of them had HbA1c level 9.0% or higher. Clinical inertia in our research was 12.6% out of all patients and 48.2% were referred to a specialist by their doctor. CONCLUSIONS For better regulation of glycemia and reduction of clinical inertia with type 2 diabetes patients, more specialized training is needed for selected physicians. Strengthening of primary healthcare and encouraging doctors to perform procedures can contribute to better outcomes of treatment, lower clinical inertia, and better education of patients.

Supporting general practitioner-based care for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (the DECIDE study): feasibility study and protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Control of T2DM can be challenging for healthcare professionals for a number of reasons, including poor concordance with medications, difficulties modifying lifestyle behaviour and also clinical inertia, which is defined as a reluctance among health professionals to intensify medications. A complex intervention, called ComputeriseD dECisIonal support for poorly controlleD typE 2 Diabetes mellitus in Irish General Practice (DECIDE), was developed, identifying T2DM patients with poor glycaemic and blood pressure control and aiming to target clinical inertia, by supporting therapeutic action, including GP-led medication intensification where appropriate. A small-scale, uncontrolled, non-randomised feasibility study highlighted the acceptability of the DECIDE intervention within Irish General Practice. This paper presents a protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the DECIDE intervention.

METHODS/DESIGN

The pilot cluster RCT will involve 14 practices and 140 patients in Irish General Practice. Intervention GPs will participate in the DECIDE intervention, comprising (a) a training programme for the practices and (b) a web-based clinical decision support system supporting treatment escalation, tailored to specific patient information. Only patients who have poorly controlled T2DM (defined as HbA1c > 70 mmol/mol and/or BP > 150/95) will be included. The primary outcomes will include measures of feasibility such as recruitment and retention of practices and acceptability of the intervention and also HbA1c. Secondary outcomes will include medication intensification, blood pressure and lipids. Control GPs will continue to provide usual care. A process evaluation will be performed to determine whether the intervention is delivered as intended and treatment fidelity assessed to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of interventions. An exploratory health economic analysis will examine the potential costs and cost effectiveness of the intervention relative to the control.

DISCUSSION

A pilot cluster RCT will establish the feasibility of a complex intervention which aims to support primary care for patients with poorly controlled T2DM in Irish General Practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol for the pilot cluster RCT is registered on the ISRCTN Registry at: ISRCTN69498919.

Assessment of the relationship between diabetes treatment intensification and quality measure performance using electronic medical records

AIMS

Assess the relationship between timely treatment intensification and hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) control quality-of-care performance measures, i.e., HbA1C levels, among patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic medical records and diabetes registry data from a large, accountable care organization (ACO) were used to isolate a sample of adult patients with type 2 diabetes who received at least one oral antidiabetes agent and had at least one HbA1C level measurement ≥8.0% (64 mmol/mol; i.e., uncontrolled diabetes) between 7/1/2011 and 6/30/2015. Treatment intensification status was evaluated for each patient during a 120-day treatment intensification window following the index HbA1c measure. Two-level hierarchical generalized linear models, with patients aggregated at the physician level, were used to assess the association between treatment intensification and achieving HbA1C quality performance measures.

RESULTS

547 patients met study selection criteria and 480 patients had at least one HbA1C test after the treatment intensification window and were used for the statistical analyses. About 40% of patients who had uncontrolled diabetes received treatment intensification during the 120-day window. Greater index HbA1C, greater patient body mass index, and fewer unique pre-index oral antidiabetes agents were significantly associated with greater likelihood of receiving timely treatment intensification. The odds of receiving treatment intensification were about 1.8 times higher (P = 0.0027) among patients with poor index HbA1C control (HbA1c level >9.0% [75 mmol/mol]) compared to other patients (index HbA1c 8.0% - 9.0%). Hispanic patients (compared to White patients) were significantly more likely to exhibit poor control after treatment intensification (odds ratio [OR] 2.91, P = 0.0304), underscoring the difficulty of controlling diabetes in this vulnerable group. In contrast, being male and being treated primarily by an internist (compared to primary treatment by a family medicine specialist) were both significantly associated with achieving superior control (HbA1c level <8.0%) after treatment intensification (OR 0.53 [P = 0.0165]; OR 0.41 [P = 0.0275], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Timely treatment intensification was significantly associated with greater likelihood of patients achieving superior HbA1C control (<8.0%) and better HbA1C control quality performance for the practice. Even in an ACO with resources dedicated to diabetes control, it is incumbent upon clinicians to readily identify and open dialogues with patients who may benefit from closely supervised, individualized attention.

Therapeutic inertia in the treatment of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

AIMS

Therapeutic inertia, defined as the failure to initiate or intensify therapy in a timely manner according to evidence-based clinical guidelines, is a key reason for uncontrolled hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. The aims of this systematic review were to identify how therapeutic inertia in the management of hyperglycaemia was measured and to assess its extent over the past decade.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic searches for articles published from January 1, 2004 to August 1, 2016 were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase. Two researchers independently screened all of the titles and abstracts, and the full texts of publications deemed relevant. Data were extracted by a single researcher using a standardized data extraction form.

RESULTS

The final selection for the review included 53 articles. Measurements used to assess therapeutic inertia varied across studies, making comparisons difficult. Data from low- to middle-income countries were scarce. In most studies, the median time to treatment intensification after a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement above target was more than 1 year (range 0.3 to >7.2 years). Therapeutic inertia increased as the number of antidiabetic drugs rose and decreased with increasing HbA1c levels. Data were mainly available from Western countries. Diversity of inertia measures precluded meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic inertia in the management of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes is a major concern. This is well documented in Western countries, but corresponding data are urgently needed in low- and middle-income countries, in view of their high prevalence of type 2 diabetes.

Therapeutic inertia in patients treated with two or more antidiabetics in primary care: Factors predicting intensification of treatment

AIMS

To determine the patterns and predictors of treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes on ≥2 non-insulin antidiabetic drugs (NIADs) and inadequate glycaemic control in primary care in Catalonia, Spain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis using electronic medical records from patients with HbA1c ≥ 7% and a first prescription for a new NIAD or insulin recorded from January 2010 to December 2014. Therapeutic inertia was defined as no intensification if HbA1c was ≥8% at baseline or during follow-up. Time to first intensification was evaluated by time-to-event analysis, and factors predicting intensification through a competing-risk regression model.

RESULTS

Among 23 678 patients with HbA1c ≥ 7%, 26.2% were censored without treatment intensification after a median follow up of 4.2 years. Among the 12 730 patients in the subgroup with HbA1c ≥ 8% at baseline or during follow-up, therapeutic inertia was present in 18.1% of cases. In the overall cohort, mean HbA1c at initiation of insulin and NIAD were 9.4% ± 1.5% and 8.7% ± 1.3%, respectively. Median time to first intensification was 17.1 months in patients with HbA1c 8.0% to 9.9%, and 10.1 months in those with HbA1c > 10%. Variables strongly associated with intensification were HbA1c values 8.0% to 9.9% (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.65-1.78) and >10% (SHR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.37-2.68); diabetes duration ≥20 years (SHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.41) and, to a lesser extent, female gender, presence of comorbidities, chronic kidney disease and microvascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensification was not undertaken in 1 in 5 patients. Both HbA1c thresholds and time until therapy intensification exceeded current recommendations.

Development of a complex intervention to promote appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus in Irish general practice

BACKGROUND

Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be seen as failure to meet recommended targets for management of key risk factors including glycaemic control, blood pressure and lipids. Poor control of risk factors is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Failure to intensify medications for patients with poor control of T2DM when indicated is called clinical inertia and is one contributory factor to poor control of T2DM. We aimed to develop a theory and evidence-based complex intervention to improve appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM in Irish general practice.

METHODS

The first stage of the Medical Research Council Framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions was utilised. To identify current evidence, we performed a systematic review to examine the effectiveness of interventions targeting patients with poorly controlled T2DM in community settings. The Behaviour Change Wheel theoretical approach was used to identify suitable intervention functions. Workshops, simulation, collaborations with academic partners and observation of physicians were utilised to operationalise the intervention functions and design the elements of the complex intervention.

RESULTS

Our systematic review highlighted that professional-based interventions, potentially through clinical decision support systems, could address poorly controlled T2DM. Appropriate intensification of anti-glycaemic and cardiovascular medications, by general practitioners (GPs), for adults with poorly controlled T2DM was identified as the key behaviour to address clinical inertia. Psychological capability was the key driver of the behaviour, which needed to change, suggesting five key intervention functions (education, training, enablement, environmental restructuring and incentivisation) and nine key behaviour change techniques, which were operationalised into a complex intervention. The intervention has three components: (a) a training program/academic detailing of target GPs, (b) a remote finder tool to help GPs identify patients with poor control of T2DM in their practice and (c) A web-based clinical decision support system.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper describes a multifaceted process including an exploration of current evidence and a thorough theoretical understanding of the predictors of the behaviour resulting in the design of a complex intervention to promote the implementation of evidence-based guidelines, through appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM.

TITRATION: A Randomized Study to Assess 2 Treatment Algorithms with New Insulin Glargine 300 units/mL

OBJECTIVE

It was uncertain whether an algorithm that involves increasing insulin dosages by 1 unit/day may cause more hypoglycemia with the longer-acting insulin glargine 300 units/mL (GLA-300). The objective of this study was to compare safety and efficacy of 2 titration algorithms, INSIGHT and EDITION, for GLA-300 in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus, mainly in a primary care setting.

METHODS

This was a 12-week, open-label, randomized, multicentre pilot study. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 algorithms: they either increased their dosage by 1 unit/day (INSIGHT, n=108) or the dose was adjusted by the investigator at least once weekly, but no more often than every 3 days (EDITION, n=104). The target fasting self-monitored blood glucose was in the range of 4.4 to 5.6 mmol/L.

RESULTS

The percentages of participants reaching the primary endpoint of fasting self-monitored blood glucose ≤5.6 mmol/L without nocturnal hypoglycemia were 19.4% (INSIGHT) and 18.3% (EDITION). At week 12, 26.9% (INSIGHT) and 28.8% (EDITION) of participants achieved a glycated hemoglobin value of ≤7%. No differences in the incidence of hypoglycemia of any category were noted between algorithms. Participants in both arms of the study were much more satisfied with their new treatment as assessed by the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire. Most health-care professionals (86%) preferred the INSIGHT over the EDITION algorithm. The frequency of adverse events was similar between algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient-driven titration algorithm of 1 unit/day with GLA-300 is effective and comparable to the previously tested EDITION algorithm and is preferred by health-care professionals.

Clinical inertia and its impact on treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Many people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) fail to achieve glycaemic control promptly after diagnosis and do not receive timely treatment intensification. This may be in part due to 'clinical inertia', defined as the failure of healthcare providers to initiate or intensify therapy when indicated. Physician-, patient- and healthcare-system-related factors all contribute to clinical inertia. However, decisions that appear to be clinical inertia may, in fact, be only 'apparent' clinical inertia and may reflect good clinical practice on behalf of the physician for a specific patient. Delay in treatment intensification can happen at all stages of treatment for people with T2DM, including prescription of lifestyle changes after diagnosis, introduction of pharmacological therapy, use of combination therapy where needed and initiation of insulin. Clinical inertia may contribute to people with T2DM living with suboptimal glycaemic control for many years, with dramatic consequences for the patient in terms of quality of life, morbidity and mortality, and for public health because of the huge costs associated with uncontrolled T2DM. Because multiple factors can lead to clinical inertia, potential solutions most likely require a combination of approaches involving fundamental changes in medical care. These could include the adoption of a person-centred model of care to account for the complex considerations influencing treatment decisions by patients and physicians. Better patient education about the progressive nature of T2DM and the risks inherent in long-term poor glycaemic control may also reinforce the need for regular treatment reviews, with intensification when required.

Effectiveness and clinical inertia in patients with antidiabetic therapy

AIMS

To establish the effectiveness of antidiabetic therapy and the frequency of clinical inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Colombia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study with follow-up of patients who had been treated for at least 1 year and were receiving medical consultation for antidiabetic treatment. Effectiveness was established when haemoglobin-A1c levels were <7% and when clinical inertia was reached, which was defined as no therapeutic modifications despite not achieving management controls. Sociodemographic, clinical and pharmacological variables were evaluated, and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 363 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were evaluated, with a mean age of 62.0±12.2 years. A total of 1,016 consultations were evaluated, and the therapy was effective at the end of the follow-up in 57.9% of cases. Clinical inertia was found in 56.8% of patients who did not have metabolic control. The most frequently prescribed medications were metformin (84.0%), glibenclamide (23.4%) and insulin glargine (20.7%). Moreover, 57.6% of the patients were treated with two or more antidiabetic medications. Having metabolic control in the first consult of the follow-up was a protective factor against clinical inertia in the subsequent consultations (OR: 0.08; 95%CI: 0.04-0.15; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus has increased in Colombia, and for the first time, clinical inertia was identifiable and quantifiable and found in similar proportions to other countries. Clinical inertia is a relevant condition given that it interferes with the possibility of controlling this pathology.

Gaps and barriers in the control of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Glycaemic control is suboptimal in a large proportion of people with type 2 diabetes who are consequently at an increased and avoidable risk of potentially severe complications. We sought to explore attitudes and practices among healthcare professionals that may contribute to suboptimal glycaemic control through a review of recent relevant publications in the scientific literature.

METHODS

An electronic search of the PubMed database was performed to identify relevant publications from January 2011 to July 2015. The electronic search was complemented by a manual search of abstracts from key diabetes conferences in 2014/2015 available online.

RESULTS

Recently published data indicate that glycaemic control is suboptimal in a substantial proportion (typically 40%-60%) of people with diabetes. This is the case across geographic regions and in both low- and higher-income countries. Therapeutic inertia appears to be an important contributor to poor glycaemic control in up to half of people with type 2 diabetes. In particular, prescribers are often willing to tolerate extended periods of 'mild' hyperglycaemia as well as having low expectations for their patients. There are often delays of 3 years or longer in initiating or intensifying glucose-lowering therapy when needed.

CONCLUSION

Many people with type 2 diabetes are failed by current management, with approximately half not achieving or maintaining appropriate target blood glucose levels, leaving these patients at increased and avoidable risk of serious complications. Review criteria: The methodology of this review article is detailed in the 'Methods' section.

Clinical inertia causing new or progression of diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Clinical inertia is a failure to intensify treatment according to evidence-based guidelines, and can have both short- and long-term adverse effects for type 2 diabetes (T2D). The aim of the present study was to demonstrate the effects of clinical inertia on glycemic control and diabetes-related complications.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a university-based hospital in Thailand. Medical records were evaluated retrospectively from January 2010 to December 2014. Patients were classified into two groups: clinical inertia and non-inertia. Clinical inertia was defined as failure to initiate insulin within 3 months in patients with HbA1c ≥9 % who were already taking two oral antidiabetic agents.

RESULTS

From 1206 records, 98 patients with mean HbA1c of 10.3 % were identified and enrolled in the study. The median follow-up time of these patients was 29.5 months and 68.4 % were classified into the clinical inertia group. The mean (± SD) HbA1c decrement in the clinical inertia and non-inertia groups was 0.82 ± 1.50 % and 3.02 ± 1.80 %, respectively, at 6 months (P < 0.001) and 1.46 ± 1.85 % and 3.04 ± 1.76 %, respectively, at the end of study (P < 0.001). Clinical inertia was associated with a significantly shorter median time to progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR); log rank test, P = 0.02 and a higher incidence of DR progression (10 vs 2.2 cases per 1000 person-months; P = 0.003). The adjusted incidence rate ratio for DR progression in the clinical inertia group was 4.92 (95 % confidence interval 1.11-21.77; P = 0.036). Being treated by general practitioners was the strongest risk factor associated with clinical inertia.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical inertia can cause persistently poor glycemic control and speed up the progression of DR in T2D.

Optimizing insulin initiation in primary care: the Diabetes CoStars patient support program

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the optimization of fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus newly initiated on insulin glargine who were enrolled in the Australian Diabetes CoStars Patient Support Program (PSP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data from 514 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who completed the 12-week Diabetes CoStars PSP was performed. All patients were initiated on insulin glargine in primary care and enrolled by their general practitioner, who selected a predefined titration plan and support from a local Credentialled Diabetes Educator. The data collected included initial and final insulin dose, self-reported FBG, and glycated hemoglobin (A1c) levels.

RESULTS

The insulin dose increased in 81% of patients. Mean FBG was reduced from 208.8 mg/dL (11.6 mmol/L) to 136.8 mg/dL (7.6 mmol/L) after 12 weeks. Initial and final A1c values were available for 99 patients; mean A1c was reduced from 9.5% (80 mmol/mol) to 8.1% (65 mmol/mol). The reductions in mean FBG and A1c were similar irrespective of titration plan. Overall, 27.2% of patients achieved FBG levels within the titration plan target range of 72-108 mg/dL (4-6 mmol/L) and an additional 43.4% of patients achieved FBG within the range recommended by current Australian guidelines (110-144 mg/dL [6.1-8.0 mmol/L]). Overall, 23.3% of patients achieved the A1c target of ≤7%.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that the majority of patients enrolled in the Diabetes CoStars PSP achieved acceptable FBG levels 12 weeks after starting insulin therapy irrespective of titration plan.