Rationale, design and baseline patient characteristics of the optimal type 2 diabetes management including benchmarking and standard treatment study in Greece

Adherence to the National Guidelines for Follow-Up Protocol in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Greece: The GLANCE Study

INTRODUCTION

Physician adherence, or lack therefore, to diabetes care and follow-up guidelines may be linked to the rates of achieving suboptimal glycaemic, blood pressure and lipid targets in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In this cross-sectional study we evaluated physician adherence to the patient follow-up protocol (PFP) of the 2017 Hellenic Diabetes Association (HDA) guidelines and also assessed glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure and lipid control achievement rates in the routine care setting in Greece.

METHODS

Eligible subjects were adults with T2DM receiving oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHAs) for ≥ 1 year who had ≥ 2 HbA1c measurements in the previous year and an HbA1c target < 7%. Overall adherence at the subject level was defined as the percentage of the 62 HDA PFP items that had been met during the past year.

RESULTS

Between June and December 2018, 601 eligible subjects (54.6% men; mean age 65.2 years; median T2DM duration 5.9 years, of whom 96.5% had ≥ 1 medical condition/comorbidity), were enrolled into the study by 53 hospital- and office-based endocrinologists, internists and general practitioners. The main OHAs prescribed at enrolment were metformin (91.0%), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (60.7%), sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (23.5%) and sulphonylureas (16.3%). Mean overall physician adherence to the PFP was 43.6%. Predictors of greater higher physicans' adherence were female sex (p = 0.026), > 3 medical conditions/comorbidities (p = 0.043) and diabetic complications (p < 0.001). HbA1c, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, systolic/diastolic blood pressure and composite metabolic targets were achieved by 82.1, 57.0, 42.6 and 21.6% of subjects, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In Greek routine care, physician adherence to the PFP of the 2017 HDA guidelines is suboptimal. Future efforts should focus on identifying the barriers to an adequate adherence by physicians to the full PFP, with the aim to provide optimal patient care.

A contemporary cross-sectional study on dyslipidemia management, cardiovascular risk status, and patients' quality of life in Greece: The CHALLENGE study

BACKGROUND

Prior studies conducted in Greece consistently indicate that dyslipidemia is suboptimally managed, while the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and related risk factors is rising.

METHODS

CHALLENGE was a multicenter, cross-sectional study carried out following the publication of guidelines advocating stricter low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets. It primarily aimed to depict LDL-C target attainment, and to assess the cardiovascular risk status and quality of life (QoL) of patients treated in a primary or secondary CVD prevention setting who had received any medical intervention for cardiovascular risk modification within 6months of enrollment.

RESULTS

Between December 2012 and April 2013, 500 patients (55% males) aged (mean±SD) 62.0±11.7years, participated in the study. Cardiovascular risk according to the 2011 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines was 'very high', 'high', and 'moderate' in 61.2%, 23.4%, and 15.4%, respectively. Overall, 92.0% of patients were on lipid-lowering treatment, yet only 23.3% had attained their ESC/EAS-defined LDL-C target. LDL-C target attainment was more likely among 'moderate' versus 'very high' cardiovascular risk patients (odds ratio: 4.04; 95% confidence interval: 2.32-7.06; p<0.001). QoL improved as cardiovascular risk decreased (EQ-VAS 71.8±16.2 in the 'very high' versus 78.3±15.1 and 80.3±15.7 in the 'high' and 'moderate' risk groups; p<0.001). Time constraints and difficulties in implementation in daily practice were the investigator's main barriers for guideline utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

During contemporary management of dyslipidemia in Greece, LDL-C target attainment is suboptimal. There is an undoubted need for improvement and implementation of cardiovascular risk assessment in routine clinical practice.

Effects of benchmarking on the quality of type 2 diabetes care: results of the OPTIMISE (Optimal Type 2 Diabetes Management Including Benchmarking and Standard Treatment) study in Greece

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of benchmarking on the quality of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) care in Greece.

METHODS

The OPTIMISE (Optimal Type 2 Diabetes Management Including Benchmarking and Standard Treatment) study [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00681850] was an international multicenter, prospective cohort study. It included physicians randomized 3:1 to either receive benchmarking for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment targets (benchmarking group) or not (control group). The proportions of patients achieving the targets of the above-mentioned parameters were compared between groups after 12 months of treatment. Also, the proportions of patients achieving those targets at 12 months were compared with baseline in the benchmarking group.

RESULTS

In the Greek region, the OPTIMISE study included 797 adults with T2DM (570 in the benchmarking group). At month 12 the proportion of patients within the predefined targets for SBP and LDL-C was greater in the benchmarking compared with the control group (50.6 versus 35.8%, and 45.3 versus 36.1%, respectively). However, these differences were not statistically significant. No difference between groups was noted in the percentage of patients achieving the predefined target for HbA1c. At month 12 the increase in the percentage of patients achieving all three targets was greater in the benchmarking (5.9-15.0%) than in the control group (2.7-8.1%). In the benchmarking group more patients were on target regarding SBP (50.6% versus 29.8%), LDL-C (45.3% versus 31.3%) and HbA1c (63.8% versus 51.2%) at 12 months compared with baseline (p < 0.001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Benchmarking may comprise a promising tool for improving the quality of T2DM care. Nevertheless, target achievement rates of each, and of all three, quality indicators were suboptimal, indicating there are still unmet needs in the management of T2DM.