Search

Objective: To compare the risk of hospitalization for infection among patients who achieve intensive versus relaxed glycemic control., Research Design and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adults age ≥65 years with type 2 diabetes from an integrated health care delivery system. Negative binomial models were used to estimate incidence rates and relative risk (RR) of hospitalization for infections (respiratory; genitourinary; skin, soft tissue, and bone; and sepsis), comparing two levels of relaxed (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 7% to <8% and 8% to <9%) with intensive (HbA1c 6% to <7%) glycemic control from 1 January 2019 to 1 March 2020., Results: Among 103,242 older patients (48.5% with HbA1c 6% to <7%, 35.3% with HbA1c 7% to <8%, and 16.1% with HbA1c 8% to <9%), the rate of hospitalization for infections was 51.3 per 1,000 person-years. Compared with HbA1c 6% to <7%, unadjusted risk of hospitalization for infections was significantly elevated among patients with HbA1c 8% to <9% (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.13, 1.39) but not among patients with HbA1c 7% to <8% (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.91, 1.08), and the difference became nonsignificant after adjustment. Across categories of infections, the adjusted RR of hospitalization was significantly higher among patients with HbA1c 8% to <9% only for skin, soft tissue, and bone infection (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.05, 1.69)., Conclusions: Older patients with type 2 diabetes who achieve relaxed glycemic control levels endorsed by clinical guidelines are not at significantly increased risk of hospitalization for most infections, but HbA1c 8% to <9% is associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for skin, soft tissue, and bone infections., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Severe hypoglycemia is a serious adverse drug event associated with hypoglycemia-prone medications; older patients with diabetes are particularly at high risk. Economic food insecurity (food insecurity due to financial limitations) is a known risk factor for hypoglycemia; however, less is known about physical food insecurity (due to difficulty cooking or shopping for food), which may increase with age, and its association with hypoglycemia., Objective: Study associations between food insecurity and severe hypoglycemia., Design: Survey based cross-sectional study., Participants: Survey responses were collected in 2019 from 1,164 older (≥ 65 years) patients with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin or sulfonylureas., Main Measures: Risk ratios (RR) for economic and physical food insecurity associated with self-reported severe hypoglycemia (low blood glucose requiring assistance) adjusted for age, financial strain, HbA1c, Charlson comorbidity score and frailty. Self-reported reasons for hypoglycemia endorsed by respondents., Key Results: Food insecurity was reported by 12.3% of the respondents; of whom 38.4% reported economic food insecurity only, 21.1% physical food insecurity only and 40.5% both. Economic food insecurity and physical food insecurity were strongly associated with severe hypoglycemia (RR = 4.3; p = 0.02 and RR = 4.4; p = 0.002, respectively). Missed meals ("skipped meals, not eating enough or waiting too long to eat") was the dominant reason (77.5%) given for hypoglycemia., Conclusions: Hypoglycemia prevention efforts among older patients with diabetes using hypoglycemia-prone medications should address food insecurity. Standard food insecurity questions, which are used to identify economic food insecurity, will fail to identify patients who have physical food insecurity only., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Introduction and Objective: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can improve glycemic control in people with diabetes on insulin therapy. We assessed rates of prescriptions for CGM in a national sample of Veterans across subgroups defined by race and ethnicity. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis of data from the U.S. Veterans Health Administration included adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy. Main exposures included self-reported race and ethnicity, and primary outcome was the percentage of patients with at least one CGM prescription between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Association of race and ethnicity categories with CGM prescription was examined using multilevel, multivariable mixed-effects models. Results: Among 368,794 patients on insulin (mean age, 68.5 years; 96% male; 96.8% type 2 diabetes; 0.8% American Indian or Alaska Native, 0.7% Asian, 18.9% Black or African American, 0.9% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 70.2% White, 2.8% multiracial, 5.7% with unknown race, and 7.0% Hispanic or Latino ethnicity), 11.2% were prescribed CGM. CGM was prescribed for 10.4% American Indian or Alaska Native, 9.7% Asian, 9.2% Black or African American, 9.3% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 11.8% White, 11.8% multiracial, and 10.1% patients with unknown race. CGM was prescribed for 8.3% Hispanic or Latino, 11.4% non-Hispanic, and 11.5% of patients with unknown ethnicity. After accounting for patient-, clinical-, and system-level factors, Black or African American patients had significantly lower odds of CGM prescription compared with White patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.64), whereas Hispanic or Latino patients had significantly lower odds compared with non-Hispanic patients (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74-0.84). Findings were consistent across subgroups with clinical indications for CGM use. Conclusions: Among Veterans with diabetes on insulin therapy, there were significant disparities in prescribing of CGM technology by race and ethnicity, which require further study and intervention.

Escalating insulin prices have prompted public scrutiny of the practices of drug manufacturers, pharmacy benefit managers, health insurers, and pharmacies involved in production and distribution of medications. As a result, a series of policies have been proposed or enacted to improve insulin affordability and foster greater equity in access. These policies have implications for other diabetes and obesity therapeutics. Recent legislation, at both the state and federal level, has capped insulin out-of-pocket payments for some patients. Other legislation has targeted drug manufacturers directly in requiring rebates on drugs with price increases beyond inflation rates, an approach that may restrain price hikes for existing medications. In addition, government negotiation of drug pricing, a contentious issue, has gained traction, with the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 permitting limited negotiation for certain high expenditure drugs without generic or biosimilar competition, including some insulin products and other diabetes medications. However, concerns persist that this may inadvertently encourage higher launch prices for new medications. Addressing barriers to competition has also been a priority such as through increased enforcement against anticompetitive practices (e.g., "product hopping") and reduced regulatory requirements for biosimilar development and market entry. A novel approach involves public production, exemplified by California's CalRx program, which aims to provide biosimilar insulins at significantly reduced prices. Achieving affordable and equitable access to insulin and other diabetes and obesity medications requires a multifaceted approach, involving state and federal intervention, ongoing policy evaluation and refinement, and critical examination of corporate influences in health care., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Rental assistance programs have been linked to better housing quality, stability, healthcare access, and reduced likelihood of uncontrolled diabetes. However, its direct association with diabetes screening is uncertain., Objective: To determine whether federal rental assistance programs are associated with lower odds of undiagnosed diabetes., Design: We used a quasi-experimental approach, comparing outcomes among adults receiving rental assistance to those who entered assisted housing within 2 years after their health data were collected. We test the a priori hypothesis that rental assistance will be associated with decreased odds of undiagnosed diabetes., Participants: Participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2018 who received rental assistance and who had diabetes., Intervention: Current rental assistance participation, including specific housing programs., Main Measures: Undiagnosed diabetes based on having hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5% but answering no to the survey question of being diagnosed with diabetes., Key Results: Among 435 eligible adults (median age 54.5 years, female 68.5%, non-Hispanic white 32.5%), 80.7% were receiving rental assistance programs at the time of the interview, and 19.3% went on to receive rental assistance within 2 years. The rates of undiagnosed diabetes were 15.0% and 25.3% among those receiving rental assistance programs vs. those in the future assistance group (p-value = 0.07). In an adjusted logistic regression model, adults receiving rental assistance had lower odds of undiagnosed diabetes (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28-0.94) than those in future assistance groups. Sex, race and ethnic group, educational level, and poverty ratio were not significantly associated with having undiagnosed diabetes, but individuals aged 45-64 years had significantly lower odds of undiagnosed diabetes (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.53) compared with those aged 18-44., Conclusions: Rental assistance was linked to lower odds of undiagnosed diabetes, suggesting that affordable housing programs can aid in early recognition and diagnosis, which may improve long-term outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: To examine the willingness of older patients to take less diabetes medication (de-intensify) and to identify characteristics associated with willingness to de-intensify treatment., Methods: Survey conducted in 2019 in an age-stratified, random sample of older (65-100 years) adults with diabetes on glucose-lowering medications in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Diabetes Registry. We classified survey responses to the question: "I would be willing to take less medication for my diabetes" as willing, neutral, or unwilling to de-intensify. Willingness to de-intensify treatment was examined by several clinical characteristics, including American Diabetes Association (ADA) health status categories used for individualizing glycemic targets. Analyses were weighted to account for over-sampling of older individuals., Results: A total of 1337 older adults on glucose-lowering medication(s) were included (age 74.2 ± 6.0 years, 44% female, 54.4% non-Hispanic white). The proportions of participants willing, neutral, or unwilling to take less medication were 51.2%, 27.3%, and 21.5%, respectively. Proportions of willing to take less medication varied by age (65-74 years: 54.2% vs. 85+ years: 38.5%) and duration of diabetes (0-4 years: 61.0% vs. 15+ years: 44.2%), both p < 0.001. Patients on 1-2 medications were more willing to take less medication(s) compared with patients on 10+ medications (62.1% vs. 46.6%, p = 0.03). Similar proportions of willingness to take less medications were seen across ADA health status, and HbA1c. Willingness to take less medication(s) was similar across survey responses to questions about patient-clinician relationships., Conclusions: Clinical guidelines suggest considering treatment de-intensification in older patients with longer duration of diabetes, yet patients with these characteristics are less likely to be willing to take less medication(s)., (© 2024 The American Geriatrics Society.)

This article reports on a study to assess the feasibility of research procedures and acceptability of QBSAFE, a set of conversation cards focused on quality of life, treatment burden, safety, and avoidance of future events in people with type 2 diabetes. The study enrolled 84 patients and 7 clinicians. Of the 58 patients who completed questionnaires, 64% agreed that the QBSAFE agenda-setting kit (ASK) helped them discuss their situation, 78% agreed that others could benefit from it, and 38% said they would use it again. Most clinicians felt confident responding to issues (in 89% of encounters) and said they would use the kit again (78%) and recommend it to colleagues (82%). The QBSAFE ASK can be feasibly implemented and holds promise in facilitating discussion and collaborative problem-solving., Competing Interests: No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported., (©2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)