Objective: People with type 1 diabetes often have suboptimal glycemic control. The gold standard of treatment is basal-bolus insulin or subcutaneous insulin infusion via insulin pump. Although insulin therapy improves glycemic control, weight gain and hypoglycemia often limit achievement of hemoglobin A1C (A1C) goals. The number of people with type 1 diabetes who are overweight or obese is increasing, and there are many similarities between what was historically called type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Therefore, there is rationale for using antihyperglycemic agents that target other pathophysiological abnormalities to facilitate weight loss and improve glycemic control. Data Sources: We performed a MEDLINE search from 1975 through October 2018 to identify articles that studied noninsulin agents in adults with type 1 diabetes and body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Identified articles were included if the study duration was ≥4 weeks, included ≥20 patients, and set mean baseline BMI ⩾25kg/m2. Data Synthesis: This review summarizes 32 clinical trials. Amylin mimetics, sodium-glucose-like transporter-2 inhibitors, and glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists demonstrate the greatest improvements in body weight and A1C. The most common adverse effects are hypoglycemia and ketosis. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Patients with type 1 diabetes may have interest in starting noninsulin agents. Clinicians need to be knowledgeable in the efficacy and adverse effect profile of these agents, specifically in people with type 1 diabetes. Conclusions: Adding noninsulin antihyperglycemic agents may benefit select overweight or obese adults with type 1 diabetes. These agents are off-label, and if used, close monitoring is essential.
Under real-world conditions, warfarin and rivaroxaban were associated with similar safety and effectiveness, even among those with suboptimal therapeutic control. Individualized decision making, taking into account the nontherapeutic tradeoffs associated with these medications (eg, monitoring, half-life, cost) is warranted.
Purpose
Studies have supported the use of packaging interventions such as pillboxes or blister packs to improve medication adherence but have not evaluated the efficacy of these interventions in a population of low socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of home-delivered pill packs on medication adherence in a low-income Black American population with Medicaid insurance.
Methods
This study was an open-label, randomized, controlled trial. The patient population studied included 80 patients followed by primary care physicians at the Cleveland Clinic. Patients were randomized to a study group who received delivery of their multidrug medical therapy, defined as a minimum of 4 medications daily, in prepackaged blisters or a control group who obtained their prescriptions from their routine pharmacy.
Results
The primary analysis compared the mean percentage of missed pills between the 2 groups using t-test analysis. The percentage of missed pills in the study group was significantly lower than in the control group (mean [SD]: 3.7% [6.0%] vs 17.4% [16.6%] missed daily pills; P < 0.001). The number of daily missed doses was also significantly lower in the study group (0.3 [0.5] vs 0.7 [0.6]; P = 0.002). Patients were on a mean of 8.1 (SD, 2.3) and 8.1 (SD, 2.6) medications in the study and control groups, respectively (P = 0.96).
Conclusion
Delivery of prepackaged medications in a low-income Black American community was demonstrated to improve medication adherence. The use of prepackaged blisters for medication home delivery is a model that can be utilized on a larger scale for patients on multidrug medical therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.