Search

Aims: To assess perceptions of patients using subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) about metabolic control, pump malfunctions, technical and insertion site adverse events (AEs) related to infusion sets/catheters as well as patients' practices., Methods: Online survey (from June 2016 to January 2017) using an actualized 39-item questionnaire directed to adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using CSII therapy and living in the province of Quebec, Canada., Results: Participants with T1D (n = 115, 72% females, 39.7 ± 14.0 years, diabetes duration: 20.9 ± 12.2 years, CSII use: 6.2 ± 4.1 years) adequately completed the survey. Infusion sets were changed every 3.3 ± 0.9 day. Improved glucose control and decreased number/severity of hypoglycemic episodes were reported by 80% and 68%/50% of subjects, respectively. Over the past year of CSII use, participants perceived no increase in anxiety/worry (84%), no negative impact on life (89%) or on time off from work/school (82%). Conversely, many experienced at least one clinical AEs at insertion site [pain (84%), adhesion (76%), irritation (69%), lipodystrophy (45%)] and technical issues [blockage (52%), cannula kinking (50%), pump stop (55%), air bubbles (46%)]. No significant association was observed between catheter wear-time and AEs. All participants had one or more problems related to CSII use, although only 37% reported addressing these issues with health professionals., Conclusion: Our study suggests that patients positively perceived CSII use although they experienced a high frequency of clinical and technical AEs. This warrants further attention by health professionals, investigators and manufacturers to optimize CSII therapy., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), the most frequent medical complication of pregnancy, is associated with several adverse outcomes over the short- and long-term for both mother and offspring. Standard treatment for GDM consists of insulin injections. Oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs), on the other hand, are still the subject of controversy. Although OHAs are seemingly as efficient as insulin and may provide better quality of life, congenital malformations and unknown long-term effects are still feared., Areas Covered: Recent data on the pharmacokinetics of two OHAs (glyburide and metformin) and their clinical use for GDM are reviewed, with a focus on clinical trials and observational studies comparing insulin with glyburide or metformin (1960 - 2010). The review will provide a comprehensive overview of the pros and cons of OHA usage, an appreciation of OHAs' efficiency for the purpose of controlling glycemia and embryogenetic basics relating to congenital malformations., Expert Opinion: While insulin treatment is an effective therapy for controlling maternal glycemia, it nevertheless requires sufficient education and skills on the part of the patient to manage properly and may cause hypoglycemia, fear and anxiety. Oral treatment as a more user-friendly alternative may thus facilitate the control of GDM in some patients.

Objective: Injected volume and subcutaneous adipose tissue blood flow (ATBF) affect insulin absorption. Pharmacokinetics of short-acting insulin analogs were established by assessing injection of small doses in lean subjects, healthy or with type 1 diabetes. In obese patients, however, daily dosages are larger and ATBF is decreased. This study assessed the kinetics of a short-acting insulin analog in obese subjects with type 2 diabetes., Research Design and Methods: Euglycemic clamps after subcutaneous lispro injections were performed. Six healthy control subjects received 10 units. Seven obese (BMI 38.3 ± 7.0 kg/m(2)) subjects with type 2 diabetes received 10, 30, and 50 units. Plasma lispro was measured by specific radioimmunoassay and ATBF by the (133)Xe-washout technique., Results: ATBF was 64% lower in subjects with type 2 diabetes than in control subjects. After 10 units injection, time to lispro plasma peak (T(max)) was similar (48.3 vs. 55.7 min; control subjects versus type 2 diabetic subjects), although maximal concentration (C(max))/dose was 41% lower in subjects with type 2 diabetes, with lower and delayed maximal glucose infusion rate (GIR(max): 9.0 vs. 0.6 mg/kg/min, P < 0.0001, 69 vs. 130 min, P < 0.0001, respectively). After 30- and 50-unit injections, T(max) (88.6 and 130.0 min, respectively) and time to GIR(max) (175 and 245 min) were further delayed and dose related (r(2) = 0.51, P = 0.0004 and r(2) = 0.76, P < 0.0001, respectively)., Conclusions: Absorption and hypoglycemic action of increasing dosages of lispro are critically delayed in obese subjects with type 2 diabetes.

Aim: To assess the impact of an intensive multitherapy (IMT) on perceived quality of life (QOL), attitudes, knowledge and diabetes self-management in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes., Methods: A 12-month randomized trial was conducted in 72 patients with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c>or=8%, blood pressure (BP)>130/80 mmHg and dyslipidemia. Subjects were assigned to the IMT or control group, each n=36. IMT consisted in monthly visits including clinical and biochemical assessment, education sessions on diet, physical exercise, medical management of diabetes and associated diseases and adjustments in medication. Control patients were under the care of their physicians. We developed and validated a diabetes-specific questionnaire assessing QOL, attitudes, knowledge, diabetes self-management and socio-demographic data for this study. Outcomes were measured at 0, 6 and 12 months., Results: Subjects were 54.8+/-8.1 years old (duration of diabetes: 10.3+/-7.2 years). At baseline, questionnaires showed no difference in QOL between groups. At 12 months, QOL improved significantly in the IMT group when compared to controls (+13.2+/-10.3/+5.6+/-13.2%, P=0.003), particularly with respect to the satisfaction scale (+25.3+/-13.9/+5.4+/-21.7%, P<0.001). QOL was not affected by complications or hypoglycaemic episodes. QOL scores improved in IMT subjects who began insulin therapy during the trial. Attitude scores, in the high normal range at baseline, did not change. Knowledge (+18.2+/-26.3/+8.9+/-30.4%, P=0.047) and diabetes self-management (+22.6+/-35.3/+6.8+/-20.1%, P<0.001) improved., Conclusions: In poorly controlled subjects, QOL improved statistically despite the inherent constraints imposed by IMT.

Background: National guidelines for managing diabetes set standards for care. We sought to determine whether a 1-year intensive multitherapy program resulted in greater goal attainment than usual care among patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus., Methods: We identified patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes receiving outpatient care in the community or at our hospital. Patients 30-70 years of age with a hemoglobin A1c concentration of 8% or greater were randomly assigned to receive intensive multitherapy (n = 36) or usual care (n = 36)., Results: The average hemoglobin A1c concentration at entry was 9.1% (standard deviation [SD] 1%) in the intensive therapy group and 9.3% (SD 1%) in the usual therapy group. By 12 months, a higher proportion of patients in the intensive therapy group than in the control group had achieved Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) goals for hemoglobin A(1c) concentrations (goal < or = 7.0%: 35% v. 8%), diastolic blood pressure (goal < 80 mm Hg: 64% v. 37%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (goal < 2.5 mmol/L: 53% v. 20%) and triglyceride levels (goal < 1.5 mmol/L: 44% v. 14%). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in attaining the targets for fasting plasma glucose levels, systolic blood pressure or total cholesterol:high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio. None of the patients reached all CDA treatment goals. By 18 months, differences in goal attainment were no longer evident between the 2 groups, except for LDL-C levels. Quality of life, as measured by a specific questionnaire, increased in both groups, with a greater increase in the intensive therapy group (13% [SD 10%] v. 6% [SD 13%], p < 0.003)., Interpretation: Intensive multitherapy for patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes is successful in helping patients meet most of the goals set by a national diabetes association. However, 6 months after intensive therapy stopped and patients returned to usual care, the benefits had vanished.