Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2014
Use of an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) to Identify Glycemic Intensification Strategies in Type 2 Diabetes.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Korytkowski Mary T, Brooks Maria, Lombardero Manuel, DeAlmeida Dilhari, Kanter Justin, Magaji Vasudev, Orchard Trevor, Siminerio Linda
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Current treatment guidelines for type 2 diabetes (T2D) recommend individualized intensification of therapy for glycated hemoglobin (A1C) ≥ 7% in most patients. The purpose of this investigation was to explore the ability of an electronic medical record (EMR) to identify glycemic intensification strategies among T2D patients receiving pharmacologic therapy.
METHODS: Patient records between 2005 and 2011 with documentation of A1C and active prescriptions for any diabetes medications were queried to identify potential candidates for intensification based on A1C ≥ 7% while on 1-2 oral diabetes medications (ODM). Patients with follow-up A1C values within 1 year of index A1C were grouped according to intensification with insulin, GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), a new class of ODM, or no intensification. Changes in A1C and continuation of intensification therapy were determined.
RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients meeting inclusion criteria were intensified with insulin (n = 416), GLP-1RA (n = 68), ODM (n = 1408), or no additional therapy (n = 3029). Patients receiving insulin had higher baseline (9.3 ± 2.0 vs 8.3 ± 1.2 vs 8.3 ± 1.3 vs 7.6 ± 1.0%, P < .0001) and follow-up A1C (8.1 ± 1.6 vs 7.5 ± 1.2 vs 7.6 ± 1.3 vs 7.2 ± 1.1%, P < .0001) despite experiencing larger absolute A1C reductions (-1.2 ± 2.1 vs -0.8 ± 1.4 vs -0.7 ± 1.4 vs -0.3 ± 1.1%, P < .0001). Patients receiving GLP-1RA were more obese at baseline (BMI: 33.6 ± 7.1 vs 37.7 ± 6.1 vs 33.7 ± 6.8 vs 32.9 ± 7.1 kg/m(2), P < .0001) and follow-up (BMI: 33.9 ± 7.3 vs 36.6 ± 6.1 vs 33.8 ± 7.0 vs 32.4 ± 7.0 kg/m(2), P < .0001) despite experiencing more absolute weight reduction. Insulin was the most and GLP-1RA the least likely therapy to be continued.
CONCLUSIONS: An EMR allows identification of prescribing practices and compliance with T2D treatment guidelines. Patients receiving intensification of glycemic medications had baseline A1C >8% suggesting that treatment recommendations are not being followed.
METHODS: Patient records between 2005 and 2011 with documentation of A1C and active prescriptions for any diabetes medications were queried to identify potential candidates for intensification based on A1C ≥ 7% while on 1-2 oral diabetes medications (ODM). Patients with follow-up A1C values within 1 year of index A1C were grouped according to intensification with insulin, GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), a new class of ODM, or no intensification. Changes in A1C and continuation of intensification therapy were determined.
RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients meeting inclusion criteria were intensified with insulin (n = 416), GLP-1RA (n = 68), ODM (n = 1408), or no additional therapy (n = 3029). Patients receiving insulin had higher baseline (9.3 ± 2.0 vs 8.3 ± 1.2 vs 8.3 ± 1.3 vs 7.6 ± 1.0%, P < .0001) and follow-up A1C (8.1 ± 1.6 vs 7.5 ± 1.2 vs 7.6 ± 1.3 vs 7.2 ± 1.1%, P < .0001) despite experiencing larger absolute A1C reductions (-1.2 ± 2.1 vs -0.8 ± 1.4 vs -0.7 ± 1.4 vs -0.3 ± 1.1%, P < .0001). Patients receiving GLP-1RA were more obese at baseline (BMI: 33.6 ± 7.1 vs 37.7 ± 6.1 vs 33.7 ± 6.8 vs 32.9 ± 7.1 kg/m(2), P < .0001) and follow-up (BMI: 33.9 ± 7.3 vs 36.6 ± 6.1 vs 33.8 ± 7.0 vs 32.4 ± 7.0 kg/m(2), P < .0001) despite experiencing more absolute weight reduction. Insulin was the most and GLP-1RA the least likely therapy to be continued.
CONCLUSIONS: An EMR allows identification of prescribing practices and compliance with T2D treatment guidelines. Patients receiving intensification of glycemic medications had baseline A1C >8% suggesting that treatment recommendations are not being followed.