Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/11000/31437
Calculating individualized glycaemic targets using an algorithm
based on expert worldwide diabetologists: Implications in real‐
life clinical practice
Title: Calculating individualized glycaemic targets using an algorithm
based on expert worldwide diabetologists: Implications in real‐
life clinical practice |
Authors: Alvarez‐Guisasola, Fernando Cebrián‐Cuenca, Ana M. Cos, Xavier Ruiz‐Quintero, Manuel Millaruelo, Jose M. Cahn, Avivit Raz, Itamar Orozco‐Beltrán, Domingo |
Editor: WILEY |
Department: Departamentos de la UMH::Medicina Clínica |
Issue Date: 2017 |
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/11000/31437 |
Abstract:
Background: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical implications of calculating an
individualized HbA1c target using a recently published algorithm in a real‐life clinical setting.
Methods: General practitioners (GPs) from the Spanish Society of Family Medicine Diabetes
Expert Group were invited to participate in the study. Each GP selected a random sample of
patients with diabetes from his or her practice and submitted their demographic and clinical data
for analysis. Individualized glycaemic targets were calculated according to the algorithm.
Predictors of good glycaemic control were studied. The rate of patients attaining their
individualized glycaemic target or the uniform target of HbA1c < 7.0% was calculated.
Results: Forty GPs included 408 patients in the study. Of the 8 parameters included in the algorithm, “comorbidities,” “risk of hypoglycaemia from treatment,” and “diabetes duration” had the
greatest impact on determining the individualized glycaemic target. Number of glucose‐
lowering agents and adherence were independently associated with glycaemic control. Overall,
60.5% of patients had good glycaemic control per individualized target, and 56.1% were well
controlled per the uniform target of HbA1c < 7.0% (P = .20). However, 12.8% (23 of 246) of the
patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% were adequately controlled per individualized target, and 2.6% (6 of
162) of the patients with HbA1c < 7.0% were uncontrolled since their individualized target was lower.
Conclusions: In a real‐life clinical setting, applying individualized targets did not change the
overall rate of patients with good glycaemic control yet led to reclassification of 7.1% (29 of
408) of the patients. More studies are needed to validate these results in different populations
|
Keywords/Subjects: community care glycaemic control survey research type 2 diabetes HbA1c target |
Knowledge area: CDU: Ciencias aplicadas: Medicina |
Type of document: application/pdf |
Access rights: info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional |
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2976 |
Appears in Collections: Artículos Medicina Clínica
|
???jsp.display-item.text9???