No abstract

OBJECTIVEIndividualization of therapy choices requires the prediction of likely response. Predictor and explanatory factors of change in HbA 1c were studied using data from a large observational study of starting insulin analog therapy (the A 1 chieve study). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSUnivariate analyses were performed for insulin-naive people and prior insulin users in the A 1 chieve study. Statistically significant factors were carried forward to baseline factor-only multivariate analyses ("predictor" analysis), and separately using all significant factors ("explanatory" analysis). Power was considered in terms of the variance explained. RESULTSGeographical region, baseline HbA 1c level, lipid levels, and baseline insulin dose were the most powerful predictors of HbA 1c change (mean change 22.1% [223 mmol/mol]) observed in the univariate analysis (r 2 > 0.010, P < 0.001). However, although the predictor and explanatory multivariate models explained 62-82% of the variance in HbA 1c change, this was mainly associated with baseline HbA 1c (r 2 = 0.544-0.701) and region (r 2 = 0.014-0.037). Other factors were statistically significant but had low predictive power (r 2 < 0.010); in the explanatory analysis, this included end-of-study hypoglycemia (insulin-naive group), insulin dose, and health-related quality of life (r 2 < 0.001-0.006, P £ 0.007). CONCLUSIONSMany factors can guide clinicians in predicting the response to starting therapy with insulin analogs, but many are interdependent and thus of poor utility. The factor explaining most of the variance in HbA 1c change is baseline HbA 1c level, with each increase of 1.0%-units (11 mmol/mol) providing a 0.7-0.8%-units (8-9 mmol/mol) greater fall. Other factors do not explain much of the remaining variance, even when including all end-of-trial measures.

DiabCare Bangladesh 2008 evaluated the current status of diabetes care in Bangladesh as a continuation of similar cross-sectional study conducted previously in 1998. The current study recruited 1952 patients from general hospitals, diabetes clinics and referral clinics to study current scenario of diabetes management from 01 March 2009 to 31 March 2009. We report the results of type 2 diabetic population who constituted 95.3% (n=1860). Results showed deteriorating glycaemic control with mean HbA1c of 8.6±2.0% with only 23.1% of the patients achieving American Diabetes Association (ADA) target of <7%. 896 (47.0%) patients were hypertensive and 850 (94.9%) were on antihypertensive medication. 70.8% of patients had LDL levels >2.6 mmol/L; 43.8% had triglycerides >2.2 mmol/L; 44.1% had HDL<1 mmol/L despite 48% of the patients being on lipid lowering agents. Microvascular, macrovascular and severe late complications were reported in 39.2%, 9.9% and 12.1% patients respectively. The rates of diabetic complications were cataract 12.9%, microalbuminuria 15.7%, neuropathy symptoms 31.7%, leg amputation 1.2% and history of angina pectoris was 6.6%. Quality of life evaluation showed that about half of patients have poor quality of life. Also, there was poor adherence to diet, exercise and self testing of blood glucose. In conclusion, majority of the patients were still not satisfactorily controlled. There is an urgent need for effective remedial measures to increase adherence to practice guidelines and to educate both patients and healthcare personnel on importance of achieving clinical targets for metabolic control.

IntroductionDevelopment of higher standards for diabetes care is a core element of coping with the global diabetes epidemic. Diabetes guidelines are part of the approach to raising standards. The epidemic is greatest in countries with recent rises in income from a low base. The objective of the current study was to investigate the availability and nature of locally produced diabetes guidelines in such countries.MethodsSearches were conducted using Medline, Google, and health ministry and diabetes association websites.ResultsGuidelines were identified in 33 of 75 countries outside North America, western Europe, and Australasia. In 25 of these 33 countries, management strategies for type 1 diabetes were included. National guidelines relied heavily on pre-existing national and international guidelines, with reference to American Diabetes Association standards of medical care and/or other consensus statements by 55%, International Diabetes Federation by 36%, European Association for the Study of Diabetes by 12%, and American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists by 9%. The identified guidelines were generally evidence-based, though there was some use of secondary evidence reviews, including other guidelines, rather than original literature reviews and evidence synthesis. In type 1 diabetes guidelines, the option of different insulin regimens (mostly meal-time + basal or premix regimens) was recommended depending on patient need. Type 2 diabetes guidelines either recommended a glycosylated hemoglobin target of <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) (70% of guidelines) or <6.5% (<47 mmol/mol) (30% of guidelines) as the ideal glycemic target. Most guidelines recommended a target fasting plasma glucose that fell within the range of 3.8–7.2 mmol/L. Most guidelines also set a 2-h post-prandial glucose target value within the range of 4.0–8.3 mmol/L.ConclusionWhile only a first step in achieving a high quality of disease management, national guidelines of quality and with fair consistency of recommendations are becoming prevalent globally. A further challenge is implementation of guidelines, by integration into local care processes.

Objective:There are several methods of assessing overweight and obesity. Several studies conducted in different populations indicate that neck circumference (NC) can be used as a simple measure of overweight and obesity. This study was conducted to evaluate NC as a marker of overweight and obesity and to determine respective cutoff values for Bangladeshi male and female participants.Research Design/Materials and Methods:This cross-sectional observational study was conducted with during July 2013–June 2014 among randomly selected 871 Bangladeshi participants (male = 496 [56.9%], female = 375 [43.1%], aged >18 years) who visited Outpatient Department of United Hospital, Bangladesh Institute of Research and Rehabilitation in Diabetes, Endocrine and Metabolic disorders, primary health-care centers located in Dhaka, Savar, Gazipur. NC of participants was taken in centimeter to the nearest 1 mm, using plastic tape measure. Main outcome included NC, waist circumferences (WC), body mass index (BMI), and waist: hip ratio (WHR).Results:Pearson's correlation coefficients indicated a significant association between NC and height (men, r = 0.33; women, r = 0.28; P < 0.0001), weight (men, r = 0.61; women, r = 0.55; P < 0.0001), BMI (men, r = 0.51; women, r = 0.41; P < 0.0001), WC (men, r = 0.61; women, r = 0.46; P < 0.0001), hip circumference (men, r = 0.61; women, r = 0.44; P < 0.0001), WHR (men, r = 0.22; women, r = 0.18; P < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that NC ≥34.75 cm in men (area under curve [AUC]: 0.77; P < 0.001) and ≥31.75 cm in women (AUC: 0.62; P < 0.001) were the best cutoff value for BMI ≥23 (overweight). NC ≥35.25 cm in men (AUC: 0.82; P < 0.001) and NC ≥34.25 cm in women (AUC: 0.76; P < 0.001) were the best cutoff value for BMI ≥27.5 (obesity). NC ≥35.25 cm in male (AUC: 0.83; P < 0.001) and NC ≥31.25 cm in women (AUC: 0.65; P < 0.001) were the best cutoff value for WC >90 cm in men and > 80 cm in women, respectively. NC ≥34.45 cm in male (AUC: 0.59; P = 0.001) and NC ≥31.25 cm in women (AUC: 0.66; P = 0.008) were the best cutoff value for WHR >0.9 in men and >0.8 in women, respectively.Conclusion:NC measurement is a simple, convenient, inexpensive screening measure to identify overweight and obese participants. Men with NC ≥34.75 cm and women with NC ≥31.75 cm are to be considered overweight while men with NC ≥35.25 cm and women with NC ≥34.25 cm are to be considered obese. NC ≥35.25 cm in male and NC ≥31.25 cm in women were the best cutoff value for abdominal obesity.