Search

Background It is uncertain if initial combination therapy with glucose-lowering agents provides longer-term beneficial cardio-renal outcomes compared to stepwise therapy in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D). Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs), we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the initial combination therapy vs a stepwise approach in newly diagnosed T2D.Methods Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and search of bibliographies to January 2022. Study-specific risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.Results Eight articles comprising 4 unique RCTs (n=5,527 participants) and one observational cohort study (n=200) that compared initial combination therapy vs stepwise therapy were included. The RR (95% CI) for myocardial infarction comparing initial combination therapy vs stepwise therapy was 1.21 (0.74-2.00). Initial combination therapy reduced levels of fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c: mean differences (95% CIs) of -0.97 mmol/l (-1.41, -0.53) and -0.13 % (-0.20, -0.07), respectively. Initial combination therapy vs stepwise therapy reduced lipid levels, blood pressure and intima media thickness, with no differences in body composition parameters, neuropathy, retinopathy, and adverse events. Single study results showed initial combination therapy reduced creatinine levels and urine albumin excretion rate. The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low.Conclusions Except for improving cardiometabolic and glycaemic parameters, a limited number of studies characterised by small sample sizes show that initial combination therapy for newly diagnosed T2D may be similar in efficacy and safety to stepwise therapy with respect to cardio-renal outcomes. There is a lack of sufficient evidence to recommend initial combination therapy with glucose-lowering agents in newly diagnosed T2D. Definitive RCTs are warranted.

Foot ulcers and amputations are common conditions in people with diabetes and can considerably impact quality of life, necessitate a lengthy hospital stay and increase mortality. Preventative foot care and examination can prevent or delay ulceration, and individuals may seek information from publicly available social media resources such as YouTube. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the educational quality and reliability of publicly available YouTube videos on diabetes foot examinations.A YouTube search for "diabetic foot examination" was conducted, and the first 100 relevant English videos focused on examining the diabetic foot were included for evaluation. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) standards were used to measure video reliability. The Global Quality Score (GQS) and the Diabetes UK Annual Foot Check (DUK-C) checklist were used to assess video educational quality. Differences in JAMA, GQS, and DUK-C ratings were analysed after videos were sorted by topic and source.The mean number of views per video was 101,311.9 ± 348,383.6, and the mean video power index was 41.6 ± 170.0. The most common upload source was from physicians (28%) and, the most popular material category was diabetes foot examination (58 videos). In terms of video reliability, 36% of videos scored 0. According to the GQS standards, only 5% of the videos are of excellent quality, while 34% are of poor quality, with 24 videos scoring between 0 and 1 on the DUK-C scale.While foot care examination videos have a substantial audience, the majority are considered low in quality and reliability. Videos on comprehensive diabetic foot examination should be accessed on reputable sources that guarantee standardisations of video quality and take into account the simplification of information transmission in order to reach lay audiences.