BackgroundLong intervals between patient visits and limited time with patients can result in clinical inertia and suboptimal achievement of treatment goals. These obstacles can be improved with a multidisciplinary care program. The present study aimed to assess the impact of such a program on glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors.MethodsIn a randomized, parallel-group trial, we assigned 263 patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to either a control group, standard care program, or a multidisciplinary care program involving a senior family physician, clinical pharmacy specialist, dietician, diabetic educator, health educator, and social worker. The participants were followed for a median of 10 months, between September 2013 and September 2014. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), lipid profiles, and blood pressure (BP) were measured. The assignment was blinded for the assessors of the study outcomes. The study registry number is.ResultsIn the intervention group, there were statistically significant (p < 0.05) post-intervention (relative) reductions in the levels of HbA1c (−27.1%, 95% CI = −28.9%, −25.3%), FBG (−17.10%, 95% CI = −23.3%, −10.9%), total cholesterol (−9.93%, 95% CI = −12.7%, −7.9%), LDL cholesterol (−11.4%, 95% CI = −19.4%, −3.5%), systolic BP (−1.5%, 95% CI = −2.9%, −0.03%), and diastolic BP (−3.4%, 95% CI = −5.2%, −1.7%). There was a significant decrease in the number of patients with a HbA1c ≥10 (86 mmol/mol) from 167 patients at enrollment to 11 patients after intervention (p < 0.001). However, the intervention group experienced a statistically significant increase in body weight (3.7%, 95% CI = 2.9%, 4.5%). In the control group, no statistically significant changes were noticed in different outcomes with the exception of total cholesterol (−4.10%, p = 0.07). In the linear regression model, the intervention and the total number of clinic visits predicted HbA1c improvement.ConclusionsImplementation of a patient-specific integrated care program involving a multidisciplinary team approach, frequent clinic visits, and intensified insulin treatment was associated with marked improvement in glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors of poorly controlled T2DM patients in a safe and reproducible manner.Trial registrationISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN83437562 September 19, 2016 Retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-017-0677-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

AIMTo explore primary care physicians’ perspectives on possible barriers to the use of insulin.METHODSThis systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight electronic databases were searched (between January 1, 1994 and August 31, 2014) for relevant studies. A search for grey literature and a review of the references in the retrieved studies were also conducted. Studies that focused on healthcare providers’ perspectives on possible barriers to insulin initiation with type 2 diabetic patients were included, as well as articles suggesting solutions for these barriers. Review articles and studies that only considered patients’ perspectives were excluded.RESULTSA total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria and were therefore included in this study: 10 of these studies used qualitative methods, 8 used quantitative methods and 1 used mixed methods. Studies included a range of different health care settings. The findings are reported under four broad categories: The perceptions of primary care physicians about the barriers to initiate insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes patients, how primary care physicians assess patients prior to initiating insulin, professional roles and possible solutions to overcome these barriers. The barriers described were many and covered doctor, patient, system and technological aspects. Interventions that focused on doctor training and support, or IT-based decision support were few, and did not result in significant improvement.CONCLUSIONPrimary care physicians’ known delay in insulin initiation is multifactorial. Published reports of attempts to find solutions for these barriers were limited in number.

Patients with diabetes have a higher risk of severe infection and mortality due to COVID-19. Considering the current limited effective pharmacological treatments, vaccination remains one of the most effective means to control the pandemic. The current study aimed to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 infection and the rate of COVID-19 vaccination coverage among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The patients were identified from a diabetes hospital registry at Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in July 2021. The history of COVID-19 infection and the vaccination status were retrieved from the National Health Electronic Surveillance Network (HESN) program and the Seha platform, respectively. A total of 11,573 patients were included in this study (representing 99.5% of all patients in the registry). A total of 1981 patients (17.1%) had a history of confirmed COVID-19 infection. The rate of vaccination with a 1st dose was 84.8% (n = 9811), while the rate of full vaccination with the 2nd dose was 55.5% (n = 6422). The analysis showed that a higher proportion of male patients were fully vaccinated than female patients (61.0% versus 51.2%, p < 0.001). There were statistically significant differences among the age groups, with the full vaccination rate ranging from 59.0% for the 61–70-year-old age group to 49.0% for the > 80-year-old age group (p < 0.001). The patients with no previous history of COVID-19 infection were more likely to get fully vaccinated than those with a previous history of the infection (63.9% versus 14.6%, respectively, p < 0.001). The factors associated with a higher likelihood of unvaccinated status included the female gender (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.705 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.528–1.902)), elderly patients in the age group of 61–70 (aOR (95% CI) = 1.390 (1.102–1.753)), the age group of 71–80 (aOR (95% CI) = 1.924 (1.499–2.470)) and the age group of >80 (aOR (95% CI) = 3.081 (2.252–4.214), and prior history of COVID-19 infection (aOR (95% CI) = 2.501 (2.223–2.813)). In conclusion, a considerable proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes had confirmed COVID-19 infection. Continued targeted efforts are needed to accelerate vaccination coverage rates among patients with diabetes in general and the particular subgroups identified in this study.

Objectives: To assess the prevalence and risk factors of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) of different risks, based on the level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted in in the chronic illness clinics in Saudi Arabia between January 2019 and February 2020. Data were extracted from 428 T2DM patients' medical records and random sampling were carried out using a ratio of 1:3, matched for gender and duration of DM. Patients with HbA1c level ≥9% were classified as 'high-risk' and HbA1c ≤7% as 'low-risk'. Retinopathy was confirmed by an ophthalmologist using fundus photography. Results:The prevalence of DR in high-risk patient was 88.1% and 22.1% in low-risk patients. The prevalence of macular oedema was higher in the high-risk compared to low-risk patients (15.8% versus 4.9%, p<0.001). Patients' mean age was 61±11 years and duration of diabetes was 13±7 years. Hemoglobin A1c and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels were significantly higher in high-risk patients (p<0.0001) in bivariate but not multivariate analysis. Conclusion:High HbA1c and LDL levels were associated with DR risk. Further multicentre studies involving large samples are required to assess the risk factors associated with DR progression.

Objectives: To explore the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics as the process and outcomes of diabetic individuals. Methods: Hospital Saudi registry at Prince Sultan Military Medical city, Chronic Illness Clinics (Family and Community Medicine), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia database was started in February 2019 and data were collected until February 2020. The data were collected by trained diabetes nurse specialists. The registry includes all patients with type II diabetes mellitus (DM) and excluded patients with type I DM. Results: A total of 8,209 patients were enrolled in the registry with a higher proportion of females than males. The mean age was 59.3 years, BMI 32.5kg/m 2 , and HBA1c levels was 8.2%. Significant gender differences for BMI, duration of diabetes, blood pressure, LDL, smoking status, and medication intake. From the first to the third visit, BMI was raised; however, LDL, diastolic blood pressure, and albumin creatinine ratio were reduced. The mean HBA1c values plummeted for all patients and 33% of the patients had a reduction in the HbA1c levels. However, HbA1c levels increased for 24.7% of the patients’ from baseline to the last visit. Conclusion: This registry provides great insights into the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia. This registry data can be used to investigate the associations between sociodemographic or clinical characteristics and glycemic control among T2DM patients in Saudi Arabia.