Objective The goal of this study was to evaluate foot-care practices by physicians throughout India who had participated in the Diabetic Foot Education Program (DFEP). Methods A structured questionnaire was administered to physicians throughout India, and their responses were analyzed descriptively. Results A total of 377 doctors responded to the DFEP opinion survey, including 261 doctors who belonged to independent diabetic foot clinics. Of these doctors, 44.4% reported managing fewer than five diabetic foot patients per week and 42.8% reported managing 5-10 patients per week. Most of these patients had non-ischemic foot, followed by those with ischemic and Charcot foot. About 58% of these physicians reported performing comprehensive clinical examinations and providing optimal preventive and therapeutic care in the treatment of diabetic foot, whereas only 25.7% reported performing only callus removal and changing dressings. Basic instruments to manage diabetic foot included the monofilament, tuning fork, biothesiometer, handheld Doppler, and pedometer, which were used by 76%, 75.5%, 59.5%, 27.7%, and 12.8% of doctors, respectively. The most common comorbidities were neuropathy, reported by 333 doctors, followed by peripheral vascular disease, reported by 297 doctors. Tools for diabetic foot education included posters in the clinic, used by 75% of doctors; pamphlets, used by 56.2%; videos, used by 45.2%; and diabetic foot applications, used by 36.7% of doctors. Conclusions There is a need to promote diabetic foot awareness and implement foot-care strategies to prevent diabetic foot and effectively manage this condition. Diabetic foot education programs will encourage clinicians to effectively use diagnostic tools for assessment and management of diabetic foot and to establish independent diabetic foot clinics.
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) use is extremely low in India, and beyond. The reasons are multifactorial, including healthcare provider factors. This study examined CR perceptions among cardiologists in India. Attendees of the 2017 Cardiology Society of India conference completed a survey. Of 285 respondents, just over one-fourth had a CR program at their institution, with a similar proportion reporting someone dedicated to providing CR advice to their patients. Only 11 (3.9%) were correct in their responses to 4 multiple choice questions regarding secondary prevention. On average, cardiologists referred 20–30% of their patients, with the greatest barrier to referral being patient disinterest.
Objective: Hypertension has been reported in 12.1% of young adults in a recent population-based study in India and is a growing concern. There is a paucity in guidelines on the definite therapeutic approach in young hypertensives. This study aimed to understand the clinician's perspective on approach to management of hypertension in young adults in India. Design and method: Cross-sectional observational survey conducted between February 6, 2020 and 22 February 22, 2020 using a structured 14-item questionnaire. Total of 2287 clinicians (cardiologists, diabetologists, consultant physicians, and family physicians) across India participated in this survey. Descriptive statistics were first computed. Inferential statistics, namely chi-square test was then run to test the associations among knowledge, awareness and practice among the respondents across India. Results: Prevalence of hypertension in young adults was observed in 10–30% by 64.8% participant clinicians. Smoking, mental stress and obesity were considered as the most common risk factors for hypertension in young adults. Parameters of sympathetic overactivity in young hypertensive patients were considered as only increased systolic blood pressure, only increased heart rate and both increased heart rate and increased systolic blood pressure by 15.1%, 24.2% and 57.4% of respondents respectively. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) were considered the most appropriate class of drugs to treat hypertension in young by 61.6% respondents. Beta-blockers were preferred by 15.8%, followed by calcium channel blockers, diuretics and ACEI by 10.4%, 7.6% and 4.6% respondents respectively. Beta-blockers were selected as antihypertensive class in young hypertensive adults based on their perception of sympathetic overactivity by 74.5% respondents. Metoprolol was the preferred beta-blocker by 63.1% respondents. Combination therapy of telmisartan & metoprolol was preferred by 15.5%, 40.9%, 43.6% clinicians in young hypertension, uncontrolled hypertension, both young and uncontrolled hypertension patients respectively. Conclusions: This study adds to the real-world data in management strategies of young Indian hypertensives. Amongst the current class of anti-hypertensive drugs, ARBs and beta -blockers were preferred by the clinicians who participated in the study. Monotherapy and combination therapy with telmisaratan and metoprolol as a prototype of the respective anti-hypertensive class were preferred in the study.
It is of interest to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of vildagliptin as monotherapy and combination therapy of vildagliptin and metformin for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients in Indian settings. The study included patients with T2DM (aged >18 years) receiving vildagliptin monotherapy and vildagliptin in combination with metformin therapy of various strengths. Data related to demographics, risk factors, medical history, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, and medical therapies were retrieved from medical records. Out of 9678 patients (median age, 52.0 years), 59.1% were men. A combination of vildagliptin and metformin (50/500 mg) was the most commonly used therapy (54.8%), and the median duration of therapy was 24.0 months. The predominant reason for selecting vildagliptin therapy was to improve HbA1c levels (87.8%). A total of 87.5% of patients required dosage up-titration. Vildagliptin therapy was used in patients with T2DM and associated complications (peripheral neuropathy, CAD, nephropathy, retinopathy, autonomous neuropathy, stroke/TIA, and peripheral artery disease). Among 5175 patients who experienced body weight changes, a majority of patients had lost weight (68.6%). The target glycemic control was achieved in 95.3% of patients. The mean HbA1c levels were significantly decreased post-treatment (mean change: 1.34%; p<0.001). Adverse events were reported in 0.4% of patients. Physicians rated the majority of patients as good to excellent on the global evaluation of efficacy and tolerability scale (98.9%, each). Vildagliptin with or without metformin was an effective therapy in reducing HbA1c helps in achieving target glycemic control, and was well-tolerated in Indian patients with T2DM continuum.
Objective: The aim of this study was to understand the prevalence, extent, clinical approach of hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients recovered from COVID-19. Methods: The round table meetings (RTMs) and survey convened a diverse panel of specialists including cardiologists, endocrinologists, diabetologists, consultant physicians, and family physicians from various geographical zones of India. A standard questionnaire including 10 questions was developed pertaining to the resurgence of hypertension and CVD in patients recovered from COVID-19. The RTMs and survey were held virtually. The collected opinions and recommendations were compiled to derive a consensus document. Results: A total of 3066 health-care practitioners (HCPs) participated. Hypertension was the most prevalent comorbidity in patients recovered from COVID-19 followed by diabetes, dyslipidemia, and coronary artery disease. Almost two-thirds of HCPs reported that 10%–30% newly diagnosed hypertension in patients recovered from COVID-19. Uncontrolled hypertension in 10-20% of COVID-19 recovered patients opined by 45% of the HCPs. About, 35% HCPs reported CV complications in 10-20% of Covid-19 recovered patients and 63% HCPs reported exacerbations of CAD in 10-30% of patients. Majority of HCPs preferred to switch to dual combination therapy from monotherapy for hypertension management (52.0%) and ARBs and its combination is most preferred combination for hypertension control (60%). Majority of the HCPs suggested follow-up after 1-2 weeks (39.0%). Close monitoring on symptoms including chest pain and breathlessness (45.0%), adherence to medication and regular monitoring of lab parameters (25%) is recommended for these patients. Conclusion: Overall observations indicate an increased incidence of hypertension and CVDs post recovery from COVID-19. A dual therapy of ARBs was the preferred choice for management of hypertension. Regular follow-up and close monitoring of symptoms to prevent further CV complications in COVID-19 recovered patients is recommended.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.