Capacity and confidence building for general practitioners on optimum insulin use

Measuring the impact of community-based interventions on type 2 diabetes control during the COVID-19 pandemic in Cape Town – A mixed methods study

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Real-World Observational Study of Glimepiride and Metformin Fixed-Dose Combination Along With Insulin in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Indian Experience

Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with a significant burden on both patients and the healthcare system. This study aimed to evaluate the demographics of patients with T2DM receiving different strengths of glimepiride and metformin combination along with insulin. This study also examined the concomitant conditions and therapies, duration of therapies, dosage titration, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, hypoglycemic events, and weight changes during the course of therapy. Methods This retrospective, multicenter (347), observational study included adult patients with T2DM who received glimepiride and metformin combination along with insulin. Data related to demographic characteristics, duration of disease, co-morbidities, concomitant medications, and dosage pattern was collected from medical records authenticated by physicians during routine care. Results A total of 7058 patients were included in the study. The median age of included patients was 55 years and around 29% were aged >60 years and 60% were men. The majority of patients (83.3%) had insulin treatment initiation after glimepiride and metformin combination while other patients (16.7%) received glimepiride and metformin combination after insulin initiation. The mean HbA1c levels significantly decreased with a mean change of 1.33%. In one-third of the patients, down-titration of the insulin dose was done, indicating the insulin-sparing effect with the addition of the glimepiride and metformin combination. The most common comorbid condition was hypertension (64.7%). Of 3705 patients, 33.2% patients had weight loss and 66.8% had weight gain. A total of 432 patients reported hypoglycemic events. Physician global evaluation of efficacy and tolerability showed a good to excellent on the scale (97.3% and 96.6%). Conclusion This study presented good HbA1c lowering with glimepiride and metformin combination with insulin, ensuring a positive clinical outcome. Good to excellent efficacy and tolerability were observed in patients with T2DM across the age groups, in early as well as long-standing disease.

Knowledge of physicians regarding the management of Type two Diabetes in a primary care setting: the impact of online continuous medical education

BACKGROUND

To explore the impact of an online continuing medical education (CME) program on physicians' knowledge about the management of type two diabetes.

METHODS

An online CME program was designed and uploaded in the CME platform, Department of Education, Ministry of health, Iran. A 28-item questionnaire was used for the assessment. In the beginning, a case scenario was introduced. Then, participants were asked to follow and answer to a pretest assessment. Details of the educational content were provided afterward. Finally, the participants took part in the same post-test exam 4 weeks later. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test was used to compare the measurements. In addition, the Mann-Whitney test was applied to compare knowledge indices between the general practitioners (GPs) and internists.

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty-six primary care physicians participated in this study. There was a significant positive effect regarding diagnosis confirmation (10.3% difference, P = 0.0001). Moreover, a smaller effect was observed in relation to the importance of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at diagnosis (5.2% difference, P = 0.0006). The effect was positive in relation to the self-reported HbA1c testing frequency: more than 90% of the participants answered correctly in the post-test exam (7.6% difference, P = 0.0001). Considering improved knowledge in the treatment of diabetes, there was a very significant difference in response to questions targeting advice on a healthy diet, and physical activity; 27.7% (P = 0.000), and 18.7% (P = 0.000), respectively. In addition, the program had a positive impact on various aspects of treatment with oral glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs). Moreover, the intervention difference was 25, and 34.4% for the questions targeting the appropriate type of insulin, and insulin initiation regimen after OGLD failure. Subgroup analyses revealed that the intervention increased the rate of correct responses among the GPs in various domains of knowledge in diagnosis and treatment. The initial differences between the GPs and internists no longer remained significant after the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge of Iranian primary health care professionals in diabetes management has significant shortcomings. This is concerning because they are at the front line of patient care. We demonstrate the effectiveness of online CME on improving GPs knowledge in the management of type 2 diabetes.