SummaryBackgroundNational guidelines for treating type 2 diabetes in the Balkans generally follow European guidelines. The current study was undertaken to estimate the rate of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurements and level of HbA1c control in diabetic patients treated in regular clinical practice settings in the Balkans and to evaluate if providing HbA1c measurements improves adherence to treatment guidelines.MethodsThis cross-sectional study enrolled type 2 diabetic patients treated by 79 primary care physicians and 102 specialists. The participants were provided with HbA1c measuring devices to measure HbA1c during regular office visits and a physician survey evaluated HbA1c the results feedback. Relevant clinical, demographic, drug treatment and specialist referral data were extracted from patient charts. Descriptive statistics and stepwise multivariate regression analysis were used.ResultsAmong 1853 patients included (average age 63.5 ± 10.7 years, 51% male) the average diabetes duration was 8.9 ± 7.1 years, 40% of patients had HbA1c measured every 6 months and 34% every 12 months (or less frequently). The rate of 6‑month measurement was higher among specialists (43%) vs. primary care physicians (32%, p < 0.01). The average HbA1c was 7.3 ± 1.5 and 35% of patients achieved the target HbA1c level of < 6.5%. Metformin monotherapy was prescribed to 28% of patients and metformin + sulphonylurea to 23%, 55% of patients on metformin monotherapy and 32% of patients on dual therapy metformin + sulphonylurea achieved the target HbA1c < 6.5%. Treatment remained unchanged in 91% and was stepped up in only 7.2% of patients. Physicians were not surprised (in 79% of patients) or were pleasantly surprised (in 11%) by the HbA1c results at the time of visit. Average diabetes duration and patient use of home glucometers were associated with the level of disease control.ConclusionsThe rates of HbA1c measurements remain low in the Balkans, although higher among specialists. Over 60% of patients, mostly treated with traditional oral antidiabetics did not achieve disease control. Providing convenient HbA1c measurement devices was not associated with a marked change in diabetes management. Future research is needed to evaluate the impact of these treatment patterns on long-term outcomes and costs to society.

IntroductionRecent large randomized controlled trials highlighted the clinical significance of hypoglycemic episodes in the treatment of diabetes. The present survey was conducted to provide information from real-life practice on the incidence of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetic patients treated with sulfonylureas.MethodsThis multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study collected data on incidence of side effects of sulfonylurea-based therapy in type 2 diabetic patients in four countries of the Balkan region (Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria) from October 2014 to June 2015.ResultsOf the 608 who participated in the study, 573 patients (mean age 67.2 years, mean body mass index 29.9 kg/m2) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. More than 90% of the patients were treated with the newer generation sulfonylureas—gliclazide or glimepiride—either as monotherapy or as dual therapy in combination with metformin. In total, 210 patients (36.6%) reported hypoglycemic episode(s) in the last 6 months. Mild episodes were reported by 132 patients (62.8%), moderate by 66 (31.2%), severe by 8 patients (4.0%), and very severe by 4 patients (2%), respectively. Overall, 171 patients (28.2%) reported body weight increase during the previous year. The mean reported body weight gain in this group of patients was 4.2 kg (SD 2.7, median 3). Among them, 68.1% gained less than 5 kg, 25.0% gained 5–9 kg, and the rest gained more than 10 kg.ConclusionAlthough newer generation sulfonylureas are generally considered safe in terms of hypoglycemia, our data indicates their use is associated with substantial risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain. Clinicians should be mindful of these findings when prescribing SUs and inform patients about the risk of hypoglycemia.FundingMerck Sharp & Dohme.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13300-017-0288-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.