Association between the reduction of face-to-face appointments and the control of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus during the Covid-19 pandemic in Catalonia

Coma, Ermengol; Miró, Queralt; Medina, Manuel; Marín-Gomez, Francesc X; Cos, Xavier; Benítez, Mència; Mas, Ariadna; Fàbregas, Mireia; Fina, Francesc; Lejardi, Yolanda; Vidal‐Alaball, Josep

doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109127

Cited by 21 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are some retrospective cohort studies that reported glucose control during the COVID‐19 pandemic in 2020, and comparing that with a similar timeframe of 2019, but their results were inconclusive 1 , 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 . Some studies reported that glucose control was better during the pandemic in 2020 17 , whereas other studies reported that it deteriorated 1 , 6 , 12 , 14 or did not change 13 , 15 , 16 , 18 compared with 2019. Most of these did not adjust for essential confounding factors 1 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18 or lacked adjustment for BMI 6 , 14 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies reported that glucose control was better during the pandemic in 2020 17 , whereas other studies reported that it deteriorated 1 , 6 , 12 , 14 or did not change 13 , 15 , 16 , 18 compared with 2019. Most of these did not adjust for essential confounding factors 1 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18 or lacked adjustment for BMI 6 , 14 . Some explored only type 1 1 or type 2 diabetes 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 18 , or did not specify the diabetes type 16 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of these did not adjust for essential confounding factors 1 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18 or lacked adjustment for BMI 6 , 14 . Some explored only type 1 1 or type 2 diabetes 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 18 , or did not specify the diabetes type 16 . Furthermore, most of the study populations were relatively small compared with the present study population 1 , 6 , 13 , 16 , 17 , 18 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are reports comparing diabetes care during the COVID‐19 pandemic in 2020 with 2019 from other countries 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 and from Japan 1 , 6 , 18 . Some report that diabetes control was unchanged 13 , 15 , 16 , 18 , whereas others report diabetes control deteriorated 1 , 6 , 12 , 14 or improved 17 . However, the effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on diabetes control might be different depending on the local pandemic state and medical systems of each country.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Substitution of telemedicine for clinic visit during the COVID‐19 pandemic of 2020: Comparison of telemedicine and clinic visit

Onishi

Ichihashi

Yoshida

et al. 2022

J of Diabetes Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims/Introduction The purpose of this retrospective observational cohort study was to compare outpatient diabetes care and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 with 2019, and to compare the glucose‐lowering effect of telemedicine and clinic visits during the state of emergency in Japan declared from 7 April to 25 May (inter‐period) 2020. Materials and Methods A total of 13 weeks before and after the inter‐period were designated as the pre‐period and post‐period, respectively. The number of study participants who had clinic visits during the pre‐period and the post‐period were 3,333 in 2020 and 3,608 in 2019. Propensity score matching was carried out to compare the effect of telemedicine and clinic visits on diabetes control in 2020 among diabetes patients with insufficient glucose control (HbA1c ≥7%). The primary outcome was post‐period HbA1c. Results The major difference between 2020 and 2019 was the use of telemedicine in 2020. After adjustment for age, sex, diabetes type, pre‐period HbA1c and pre‐period body mass index, glycemic control evaluated by HbA1c was significantly worse in the post‐period of 2020 than 2019. In the propensity score‐matched 618 pairs, the clinic visit group had significantly better post‐period HbA1c than the telemedicine group (7.5% vs 7.4%, P = 0.023). Conclusions Glycemic control was slightly, but significantly, worse in 2020 than 2019. Although telemedicine significantly improved glycemic control during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020, clinic visits improved HbA1c significantly more. The substitution of telemedicine for clinic visits appears to be a viable option under emergency conditions, but clinic visits might be a better option when possible.

show abstract