Search

Background/Objectives: This study assessed the proportion of secondary cardiovascular prevention patients who achieved low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol targets as per the 2019 ESC/EAS Dyslipidemia Guidelines. We also evaluated whether lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) were adjusted in patients not meeting targets and analyzed the likelihood of these modifications achieving recommended levels. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional observational study retrospectively reviewed medical records of 1909 outpatients in 9 Italian cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention clinics from January 2023 to June 2024. Inclusion criteria included prior atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and recent LDL-cholesterol levels. Data included demographics, ASCVD presentation, lipid profiles, and LLTs. Patients at very high risk had LDL targets of ≤55 mg/dL, or ≤40 mg/dL for recurrent events within 2 years. Clinicians' approaches to LLT modification in patients not at target were recorded, with LLT efficacy estimated based on percentage distance from LDL-cholesterol targets. Results: Of the 1909 patients, 41.3% met the LDL-cholesterol target. Predictors of achieving targets included male gender, cardiac rehabilitation, recent acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, and triple therapy (statin + ezetimibe + PCSK9 inhibitors). Conversely, a target of ≤40 mg/dL, lack of therapy, and monotherapy were negative predictors. Among 1074 patients not at target, LLT modifications were proposed for 48.6%. Predictors of LLT modification included recent ASCVD events, cardiac rehabilitation, and greater percentage distance from the LDL target, while advanced age and an LDL target of ≤40 mg/dL were negative predictors. However, only 42.3% of modified therapies were predicted to be effective in reaching LDL targets. Conclusions: Despite 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines, a significant proportion of high-risk patients did not achieve LDL targets, and proposed LLT modifications were often insufficient. More intensive LLT regimens are needed to improve outcomes in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The swift uptake of new medications into clinical practice has many benefits; however, slow uptake has been seen previously with other guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) in heart failure (HF). Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors are a novel therapy in HF proven to be efficacious and will have beneficial clinical outcomes if prescribed. Understanding physician perspectives on prescribing GDMT in HF can help target strategies to bridge the gap between guidelines and practice. Methods: The study followed the PRISMA guide for scoping reviews. A search was conducted using EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed databases in April 2024. Studies included were those using qualitative methods to assess physician perspectives towards prescribing any HF medication. Common themes were identified through thematic synthesis following the methods from Cochrane Training and using software MAXQDA Analysis Pro. Results: 708 studies were found in the search, with 23 full studies included. The most pertinent barriers identified were concern for medication adverse effects, unclear role responsibilities between physicians of different specialities, patient co-morbidities, and unwillingness to alter therapies of stable patients. The most identified enablers included awareness of efficacy, influence from colleagues, and the use of multi-media approaches for information dissemination. Perceptions were also found to change over time and vary among prescriber groups. Conclusions: Physicians perceive common barriers and enablers of prescribing GDMT in HF, despite differences in prescriber groups and time periods. The identified barriers and enablers may be targeted to improve implementation of GDMT into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Hypertension is a common chronic disease that seriously endangers the health of the population. The primary-care doctors are the main force in the management of hypertension. However, the doctor-induced therapeutic of inertia greatly affects the achievement of primary-care hypertension control. Objective The aim of this study is to investigate the current status of therapeutic inertia among primary healthcare providers in the diagnosis and treatment process of hypertension, and analyze the causes of therapeutic inertia, providing a reference basis for improving hypertension control rates in China. Methods A simple random sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to primary healthcare providers in 32 primary healthcare institutions in Tianjin from July to August 2023. The therapeutic inertia in the diagnosis and treatment process of hypertension was evaluated from three dimensions: "soft reasons" and "overestimation of treatment efficacy" as well as "medical insurance policies". Binary Logistic regression analysis was employed to explore the influencing factors of therapeutic inertia. Results A total of 407 questionnaires were distributed in this study, and 386 valid questionnaires were collected, yielding an effective response rate of 94.84%. The average score for primary healthcare providers' knowledge of hypertension diagnosis and treatment was 6 (0.5), with a scoring rate of 61.11% (5.50/9.00). The total score for therapeutic inertia in hypertension management was 48 (7.0), with a scoring rate of 56.55% (45.24/80.00). The scores for the "soft reasons" dimension, "overestimation of treatment efficacy" dimension, and "medical insurance policies" dimension were 26 (4.8), 10 (2.0), and 6 (2.5) respectively, with scoring rates of 51.92% (25.96/50.00), 65.40% (9.81/15.00), and 46.40% (6.96/15.00) respectively. When comparing the average scores of the three dimensions of therapeutic inertia, the "overestimation of treatment efficacy" dimension had the highest score compared to the other two groups (P

Abstract Background Therapeutic inertia refers to the failure of healthcare providers to initiate or intensify therapy based on current evidence-based guidelines, even when the desired treatment goal is not achieved. Despite poorly controlled hypertension, clinicians often hesitate to intensify treatment. Therapeutic inertia is currently receiving more attention as a significant reason for clinicians’ inability to effectively manage hypertension. However, in our setting, there is limited knowledge about therapeutic inertia and its contributing factors. Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate therapeutic inertia and contributing factors among ambulatory patients with hypertension. Method A prospective observational study was conducted at the cardiac clinic of Ayder comprehensive specialized hospital in the Tigray region of northern Ethiopia. Patients were recruited into the study during their medication refilling appointments using a simple random sampling technique. All patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months to assess therapeutic inertia, which was defined as the healthcare providers’ failure to initiate or intensify therapy based on current evidence-based guidelines when therapeutic goals were not achieved. Data were collected through patient interviews and review of their medical records. We utilized binary logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with therapeutic inertia. Result The study included 282 participants, with an equal male-to-female ratio. The mean age of the participants was 56.6 ± 12.3 years. Among all participants, a majority (67.4%) had uncontrolled hypertension. The study revealed that 72% of patients with uncontrolled hypertension experienced therapeutic inertia. In response to this issue, we recommended dose escalation for 73% of the patients and the initiation of additional drug therapy for 27% of them. Multivariable analysis indicated that having three or more medications (AOR = 4.74, 95%CI = 1.94–11.61) and having stage II hypertension (AOR = 3.06, 95%CI = 1.32–7.08) were identified as independent predictors of therapeutic inertia. Conclusion The findings of our study indicated that a large proportion of the patients had poorly controlled hypertension, and a significant number of these patients also demonstrated therapeutic inertia. The number of medications and stage II hypertension were identified as independent predictors of therapeutic inertia. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize patients at risk of therapeutic inertia and provide them with additional support. Moreover, practice based training should be given to clinicians in order to enhance treatment intensification and overall treatment outcome among ambulatory patients with hypertension.

Introduction: Therapeutic inertia in type 2 diabetes, defined as a failure to intensify treatment despite poor glycemic control, can arise due to a variety of factors, despite evidence linking improved glycemic control with reductions in diabetes-related complications. The present study aimed to evaluate the health and economic burden of therapeutic inertia in people with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia. Methods: The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (v.9.0) was used to evaluate outcomes. Baseline cohort characteristics were sourced from Saudi-specific data, with baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) tested at 8.0%, 9.0%, and 10.0%. Modeled subjects were brought to an HbA1c target of 7.0% immediately or after delays of 1–5 years across time horizons of 3–50 years. Outcomes were discounted annually at 3.0%. Costs were accounted from a societal perspective and expressed in 2023 Saudi Arabian Riyals (SAR). Results: Immediate glycemic control was associated with improved or equal life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy and cost savings in all scenarios compared with delays in achieving target HbA1c. Combined cost savings ranged from SAR 411 (EUR 102) per person with a baseline HbA1c of 8.0% versus a 1-year delay over a 3-year time horizon, to SAR 21,422 (EUR 5291) per person with a baseline HbA1c of 10.0% versus a 5-year delay over a 50-year time horizon. Discounted life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy were projected to improve by up to 0.4 years and 0.5 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively, with immediate glycemic control. Conclusion: Therapeutic inertia was associated with a substantial health and economic burden in Saudi Arabia. Interventions and initiatives that can help to reduce therapeutic inertia are likely to improve health outcomes and reduce healthcare expenditure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors. Methods: A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants. Results: Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance. Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration. Conclusion: In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary This mixed‐methods study aimed to explore factors contributing to therapeutic inertia among people living with obesity in Canada from the perspective of general/family practitioners (GP/FPs). One‐on‐one interviews and online surveys guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework were conducted. A total of 20 general/family practitioners were interviewed and 200 general/family practitioners were surveyed. Key findings from interviews were used to guide the development of the survey. Spearman's correlation analysis evaluated the association between general/family practitioners theme domain scores and their familiarity with the 2020 Canadian Adult Obesity Clinical Practice Guidelines. The 200 general/family practitioners surveyed provided representation across Canada, with diversity in age, background, and gender. The most prominent domains related to therapeutic inertia that were positively influenced by familiarity with Clinical Practice Guidelines were Beliefs about Capabilities (rs = .27; p < .01), Skills (rs = .23; p < .01), Behavioural Regulation (rs = .24; p < .01) and Emotions (rs = .23; p < .01). Irrespective of their familiarity with Clinical Practice Guidelines, most general/family practitioners reported that environmental and contextual barriers impact obesity management. Particularly, while financial barriers were reported by participants regardless of Clinical Practice Guidelines familiarity, general/family practitioners familiar with Clinical Practice Guidelines more often reported having time to discuss obesity management with patients. This study identified perceptions, resource and training considerations that contribute to healthcare decision‐making and therapeutic inertia in obesity management among general/family practitioners and highlighted key areas to target with interventions in primary care to facilitate obesity management, which should be multi‐faceted, with a focus on incorporating obesity education into healthcare providers training programs and improving systemic and financial support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sodium‐glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) are novel agents for heart failure (HF) and are now recommended in guidelines. Understanding general physicians' perspectives can help to optimise utilisation of this new medication. Aim: To understand the clinical concerns and barriers from general physicians about prescribing SGLT2is in a general medicine cohort. Methods: A questionnaire exploring clinicians' experience, comfort level and barriers to prescribing SGLT2is in patients with HF, incorporating two clinical scenarios, was disseminated to Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand members over a 2‐month period. Results: Ninety‐eight participants responded to the questionnaire (10.8% response rate). Most respondents (66.3%) were senior medical staff. Most participants worked in metropolitan settings (64.3%) and in public hospital settings (83.7%). For HF with reduced ejection fraction, 23.5% of participants reported prescribing SGLT2is frequently (defined as prescribing SGLT2is frequently over 75% of occasions). For HF with preserved ejection fraction, 57.1% of participants reported prescribing SGLT2is less than 25% of the time. Almost half of the participants (44%) expressed a high level of familiarity with therapeutic knowledge of SGLT2is, while 47% indicated high familiarity with potential side effects. Patient complexity, cost of medications and discontinuity of care were identified as important barriers. Euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis was the side effect that caused the most hesitancy to prescribe SGLT2is in 48% of the respondents. Conclusion: General physicians in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand are familiar with the therapeutic knowledge and side effects of SGLT2is. Patient complexity, medication cost and discontinuity of care were significant barriers to the use of SGLT2is for HF among general physicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Achieving and maintaining adequate glycaemic control is critical to reduce diabetes‐related complications. Therapeutic inertia is one of the leading causes of suboptimal glycaemic control. Aim: To assess the degree of inertia in insulin initiation and intensification in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM‐2). Methods: We performed a retrospective longitudinal cohort study and followed DM‐2 2 years before and 2 years after the start of insulin. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved glycaemic targets (HBA1c ≤ 7.5%) at 6th month, 1st year and 2nd year. Results: We included 374 predominantly male subjects (62%). The mean age was 55.3 ± 11.3 years, the mean duration of DM‐2 was 12.0 ± 7.3 years, 64.4% were obese, 47.6% had a microvascular disease, and 24.3% had a macrovascular disease. The mean HBA1c at −2nd year and −1st year was 9.2 ± 2.1% and 9.3 ± 2.0%, respectively. The mean HbA1C at the time of insulin initiation was 10.4 ± 2.1%. The mean HBA1c at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 8.5 ± 1.8%, 8.4 ± 1.8% and 8.5 ± 1.7%, respectively. The proportion of subjects who achieved HBA1c targets at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 32.9%, 31.0% and 32.9%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that achieving HBA1c targets at 6th month and 1st year increases the odds of achieving HBA1c targets at 2nd year (OR 4.87 [2.4–9.6] p < 0.001) and (OR 6.2 [3.2–12.0], p < 0.001), respectively. Conclusion: In people with DM‐2, there was an alarming delay in starting and titrating insulin. The reduction in HBA1c plateaued at 6th month. Earlier initiation and intensification of insulin therapy are critical to achieving glycaemic targets. More studies are needed to examine the causes of therapeutic inertia from physicians', patients' and systems' points of view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hypertension is the main risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Notably, only about half of hypertensive patients manage to achieve the recommended blood pressure (BP) control. Main reasons for the persistence of uncontrolled BP during treatment are lack of compliance on the patients' side, and therapeutic inertia on physicians' side. Methods: During the global BP screening campaign "May Measure Month" (MMM) (May 1st to July 31st, 2022), a nationwide, cross-sectional, opportunistic study endorsed by the Italian Society of Hypertension was conducted on volunteer adults ≥ 18 years to raise awareness of the health issues surrounding high BP. A questionnaire on demographic/clinical features and questions on the use of fixed-dose single-pills for the treatment of hypertension was administered. BP was measured with standard procedures. Results: A total of 1612 participants (mean age 60.0±15.41 years; 44.7% women) were enrolled. Their mean BP was 128.5±18.1/77.1±10.4 mmHg. About half of participants were sedentary, or overweight/obese, or hypertensive. 55.5% individuals with complete BP assessment had uncontrolled hypertension. Most were not on a fixed-dose combination of antihypertensive drugs and did not regularly measure BP at home. Self-reported adherence to BP medications was similar between individuals with controlled and uncontrolled BP (95% vs 95.5%). Conclusions: This survey identified a remarkable degree of therapeutic inertia and poor patients' involvement in the therapeutic process and its monitoring in the examined population, underlining the importance of prevention campaigns to identify areas of unsatisfactory management of hypertension, to increase risk factors' awareness in the population with the final purpose of reducing cardiovascular risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Low-dose combinations are a promising intervention for improving blood pressure (BP) control but their effects on therapeutic inertia are uncertain. METHODS: Analysis of 591 patients randomized to an ultra-low-dose quadruple pill or initial monotherapy. The episode of therapeutic inertia was defined as a patient visit with a BP of >140/90 mm Hg without intensification of antihypertensive treatment. We compared the frequency of therapeutic inertia episodes between Quadpill and initial monotherapy as a proportion of the total population (intention-to-treat analysis with the denominator being all participants randomized) and as a proportion of people with uncontrolled BP (with the denominator being participants with uncontrolled BP). RESULTS: Therapeutic inertia occurred in fewer participants randomized to Quadpill compared with monotherapy. For example, among the 390 participants with a 6-month follow-up, therapeutic inertia according to unattended BP was 21/192 (11%) versus 45/192 (23%), P =0.002. There were similar rates of therapeutic inertia among those with uncontrolled unattended BP in each group (all P >0.4). Consistent observations were seen with the use of attended office BP measures. The major determinants of not intensifying treatment during follow-up were BP readings that were close to target and large improvements in BP compared with the previous visit. CONCLUSIONS: Among all treated individuals, low-dose Quadpill reduced the number of therapeutic inertia episodes compared with initial monotherapy. After the first follow-up visit, most high BP values did not lead to treatment intensification in both groups. Education is needed about the importance of treatment intensification despite a significant improvement in BP or BP being close to target. REGISTRATION: URL: https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=ACTRN12616001144404; Unique identifier: ACTRN12616001144404 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past 2 decades, health care has witnessed technological and pharmacological advancements leading to innovations in diabetes management. Despite these advances, published guidelines, and treatment algorithms, most people with diabetes remain above glycemic targets. Thus, the authors designed a novel care model aimed at improving several causative factors, including therapeutic inertia, limited access to endocrinology and cardiovascular specialists, time constraints, and complexity in incorporating clinical practice guidelines. The model involves collaboration between the diabetes specialty team and primary care providers (PCPs). The intervention reviewed uncontrolled diabetes data and the patient's electronic medical record (EMR) and sent personalized, evidence-based recommendations to the provider using the task function in the EMR. Other services (eg, diabetes education) were utilized to optimize patient care to achieve optimal glycemic targets and address cardiometabolic risk. The overall mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) decreased pre-post intervention by almost 1%, and 52.1% (347 of 666) of the cohort had ≥−0.5% change in HbA1c post-intervention. All pathways exhibited a decrease in HbA1c. Team-based approaches to managing diabetes patient care were the most effective. The interventions effectively utilized the resources across the health system without placing additional load or burden on primary care or diabetes specialty care teams. In the future, the authors hope to address the limitations of the current gap caused by increasing diabetes numbers, decreasing availability of PCPs and endocrinologists, and fee-for-service models using the innovative specialty consultant–primary care connection and knowledge exchange offered by this novel model, which can only be sustained with payer's support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess diabetes-related complications, glycemic levels, and healthcare utilization 12 months after exposure to therapeutic inertia among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the OneFlorida Clinical Research Consortium (electronic health records from Florida practices/clinics). The cohort included adult patients (≥18 years old) with T2D who had an HbA1c≥7.0% (53 mmol/mol) recorded from January 1, 2014-September 30, 2019. Therapeutic inertia (exposed vs. not exposed) was evaluated during the six months following HbA1c≥7.0% (53 mmol/mol). The outcomes assessed during the 12-month follow-up period included diabetes-related complications (continuous Diabetes Complications and Severity Index (DCSI)), glycemic levels (continuous follow-up HbA1c lab), and healthcare utilization counts. We analyzed data using multivariable regression models, adjusting for covariates. The cohort included 26,881 patients with T2D (58.94% White race, 49.72% female, and mean age of 58.82 (SD=13.09)). After adjusting for covariates, therapeutic inertia exposure was associated with lower DCSI (estimate=−0.14 (SE=0.03), p < 0.001), higher follow-up HbA1c (estimate=0.14 (SE=0.04), p < 0.001), and lower rates of ambulatory visits (rate ratio=0.79, 95% CI=0.75–0.82). Findings communicate the clinical practice implications and public health implications for combating therapeutic inertia in diabetes care. • Therapeutic inertia was studied among nearly 27,000 patients with type 2 diabetes. • Diabetes-related complications/severity scores were associated with therapeutic inertia. • HbA1c lab values were higher among patients exposed to therapeutic inertia. • Patients experiencing therapeutic inertia had lower rates of ambulatory visits. • Findings add timely, real-world evidence from electronic health records. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Lack of initiation or escalation of blood pressure (BP) lowering medication when BP is uncontrolled, termed therapeutic inertia (TI), increases with age and may be influenced by comorbidities. METHODS We examined the association of age and comorbidities with TI in 22,665 visits with a systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg among 7,415 adults age ≥65 years receiving care in clinics that implemented a hypertension quality improvement program. Generalized linear mixed models were used to determine the association of comorbidity number with TI by age group (65–74 and ≥75 years) after covariate adjustment. RESULTS Baseline mean age was 75.0 years (SD 7.8); 41.4% were male. TI occurred in 79.0% and 83.7% of clinic visits in age groups 65–74 and ≥75 years, respectively. In age group 65–74 years, prevalence ratio of TI with 2, 3–4, and ≥5 comorbidities compared with zero comorbidities was 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04, 1.12), 1.08 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.12), and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.20), respectively. The number of comorbidities was not associated with TI prevalence in age group ≥75 years. After implementation of the improvement program, TI declined from 80.3% to 77.2% in age group 65–74 years and from 85.0% to 82.0% in age group ≥75 years (P  < 0.001 for both groups). CONCLUSIONS TI was common among older adults but not associated with comorbidities after age ≥75 years. A hypertension improvement program had limited impact on TI in older patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin is an essential drug in the treatment of diabetes, often necessary for managing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It should be considered in cases of severe hyperglycemia requiring hospitalization, after the failure of other treatments, in advanced chronic kidney disease, liver cirrhosis, post-transplant diabetes, or during pregnancy. Moreover, in specific patient subgroups, early initiation of insulin is crucial for hyperglycemia control and prevention of chronic complications. Clinical guidelines recommend initiating insulin when other treatments fail, although there are barriers that may delay its initiation. The timing of initiation depends on individual patient characteristics. Typically, insulinization starts by adding basal insulin to the patient's existing treatment and, if necessary, progresses by gradually introducing prandial insulin. Several barriers have been identified that hinder the initiation of insulin, including fear of hypoglycemia, lack of adherence, the need for glucose monitoring, the injection method of insulin administration, social rejection associated with the stigma of injections, weight gain, a sense of therapeutic failure at initiation, lack of experience among some healthcare professionals, and the delayed and reactive positioning of insulin in recent clinical guidelines. These barriers contribute, among other factors, to therapeutic inertia in initiating and intensifying insulin treatment and to patients' non-adherence. In this context, the development of once-weekly insulin formulations could improve initial acceptance, adherence, treatment satisfaction, and consequently, the quality of life for patients. Currently, two once-weekly basal insulins, insulin icodec and basal insulin BIF, which are in different stages of clinical development, may help. Their longer halflife translates to lower variability and reduced risk of hypoglycemia. This review addresses the need for insulin in T2DM, its positioning in clinical guidelines under specific circumstances, the current barriers to initiating and intensifying insulin treatment, and the potential role of once-weekly insulin formulations as a potential solution to facilitate timely initiation of insulinization, which would reduce therapeutic inertia and achieve better early control in people with T2DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes (T2D), are difficult to manage because they demand continuous therapeutic review and monitoring. Beyond achieving the target HbA1c, new guidelines for the therapy of T2D have been introduced with the new groups of antidiabetics, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1ra) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-in). Despite new guidelines, clinical inertia, which can be caused by physicians, patients or the healthcare system, results in T2D not being effectively managed. This opinion paper explores the shift in T2D treatment, challenging assumptions and evidence-based recommendations, particularly for family physicians, considering the patient's overall situation in decision-making. We looked for the possible reasons for clinical inertia and the poor application of guidelines in the management of T2D. Guidelines for antidiabetic drugs should be more precise, providing case studies and clinical examples to define clinical contexts and contraindications. Knowledge communication can improve confidence and should include clear statements on areas of decision-making not supported by evidence. Precision medicine initiatives in diabetes aim to identify subcategories of T2D patients (including frail patients) using clustering techniques from data science applications, focusing on CV and poor treatment outcomes. Clear, unconditional recommendations for personalized T2D management may encourage drug prescription, especially for family physicians dealing with diverse patient contexts and clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and objective: Limited information is available on how neurologists make therapeutic decisions in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), especially when new treatments with different mechanisms of action, administration, and safety profile are being approved. Decision-making can be complex under this uncertainty and may lead to therapeutic inertia (TI), which refers to lack of treatment initiation or intensification when therapeutic goals are not met. The study aim was to assess neurologists' TI in NMOSD. Methods: An online, cross-sectional study was conducted in collaboration with the Spanish Society of Neurology. Neurologists answered a survey composed of demographic characteristics, professional background, and behavioral traits. TI was defined as the lack of initiation or intensification with highefficacy treatments when there is evidence of disease activity and was assessed through five NMOSD aquaporin-4 positive (AQP4+) simulated case scenarios. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between neurologists' characteristics and TI. Results: A total of 78 neurologists were included (median interquartile range [IQR] age: 36.0 [29.0--46.0] years, 55.1% male, median [IQR] experience managing demyelinating conditions was 5.2 [3.0--11.1] years). The majority of participants were general neurologists (59.0%) attending a median (IQR) of 5.0 NMOSD patients (3.0--12.0) annually. Thirty participants (38.5%) were classified as having TI. Working in a low complexity hospital and giving high importance to patient's tolerability/safety when choosing a treatment were predictors of TI. Conclusion: TI is a common phenomenon among neurologists managing NMOSD AQP4+. Identifying TI and implementing specific intervention strategies may be critical to improving therapeutic decisions and patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We opted to study how support staff operational capacity and diabetes competences may impact the timeliness of basal insulin-initiation in general practice patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Design/Setting/Outcomes: This was an observational and retrospective study on Norwegian primary care patients with T2D included from the ROSA4-dataset. Exposures were (1) support staff size, (2) staff size relative to number of GPs, (3) clinic access to a diabetes nurse and (4) share of staff with diabetes course (1 and 2 both relate to staff operational capacity, whereas 3 and 4 are both indicatory of staff diabetes competences). Outcomes were 'timely basal insulin-initiation' (primary) and 'attainment of HbA1c<7%' after insulin start-up (secondary). Associations were analyzed using multiple linear regression, and directed acyclic graphs guided statistical adjustments. Subjects: Insulin naïve patients with 'timely' (N = 294), 'postponed' (N = 219) or 'no need of' (N = 3,781) basal insulin-initiation, respectively. Results: HbA1c [median (IQR)] increased to 8.8% (IQR, 8.0, 10.2) prior to basal insulin-initiation, which reduced HbA1c to 7.3 (6.8–8.1) % by which only 35% of the subjects reached HbA1c <7%. Adjusted risk of 'timely basal insulin-initiation' was more than twofold higher if access to a diabetes nurse (OR = 2.40, [95%CI, 1.68, 3.43]), but related only vaguely to staff size (OR = 1.01, [95%CI, 1.00, 1.03]). No other staff factors related significantly to neither the primary nor the secondary outcome. Conclusion: In Norwegian general practice, insulin initiation in people with T2D may be affected by therapeutic inertia but access to a diabetes nurse may help facilitating more timely insulin start-up. In patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) cared for by their general practice physician (GP), insulin therapy was susceptible to therapeutic inertia. In Norwegian general practice, chance of timely basal insulin-initiation was found more than two-fold higher if the GP had access to a diabetes nurse. In contrast, the timeliness of basal insulin-initiation in general practice patients with T2D seemed unaffected by share of support staff with diabetes course and by factors indicatory of support staff overall operational capacity. In Norwegian general practice, a diabetes nurse seems to offer unique clinical benefits to the care of insulin treated patients with T2D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adequate glycemic control is key to prevent morbi-mortality from type 2 diabetes (T2D). Despite the increasing availability of novel, effective, and safe medications for the treatment of T2D, and periodically updated guidelines on its management, the overall rate of glycemic goal attainment remains low (around 50%) and has not improved in the past decade. Therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as the failure to advance or de-intensify medical therapy when appropriate to do so, has been identified as a central contributor to the lack of progress in the rates of HbA1c goal attainment. The time to treatment intensification in patients not meeting glycemic goals has been estimated to be between 1 and 7 years from the time HbA1c exceeded 7%, and often, even when an intervention is carried out, it proves insufficient to achieve glycemic goals, which led to the concept of intensification inertia. Therefore, finding strategies to overcome all forms of TI in the management of T2D is a fundamental initiative, likely to have an enormous impact in health outcomes for people with T2D. There are several factors that have been described in the literature leading to TI, including clinician-related, patient-related, and healthcare system-related factors, which are discussed in this review. Likewise, several interventions addressing TI had been tested, most of them proving limited efficacy. Within the most effective interventions, there appear to be two common factors. First, they involve a team-based effort, including nurses, pharmacists, and diabetes educators. Second, they were built upon a framework based on results of qualitative studies conducted in the same context where they were later implemented, as will be discussed in this article. Given the complex nature of TI, it is crucial to use a research method that allows for an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon. Most of the literature on TI is focused on quantitatively describing its consequences; unfortunately, however, not many study groups have undertaken qualitative studies to deeply investigate the drivers of TI in their diverse contexts. This is particularly true in the United States, where there is an abundance of publications exploring the effects of different strategies to overcome TI in type 2 diabetes, but a severe shortage of qualitative studies aiming to truly understand the phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: International guidelines for diabetes care emphasize the urgency of promptly achieving and sustaining adequate glycemic control to reduce the occurrence of micro/macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, data from the Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists (AMD) Annals reveal that only 47% of T2DM patients reach appropriate glycemic targets, with approximately 30% relying on insulin therapy, either solely or in combination. This artificial intelligence analysis seeks to assess the potential impact of timely insulin initiation in all eligible patients via a "what-if" scenario simulation, leveraging real-world data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized the AMD Annals database, comprising 1,186,247 T2DM patients from 2005 to 2019. Employing the Logic Learning Machine (LLM), we simulated timely insulin use for all eligible patients, estimating its effect on glycemic control after 12 months within a cohort of 85,239 patients. Of these, 20,015 were employed for the machine learning phase and 65,224 for simulation. Results: Within the simulated scenario, the introduction of appropriate insulin therapy led to a noteworthy projected 17% increase in patients meeting the metabolic target after 12 months from therapy initiation within the cohort of 65,224 individuals. The LLM's projection envisages 32,851 potential patients achieving the target (hemoglobin glycated < 7.5%) after 12 months, compared to 21,453 patients observed in real-world cases. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for this model demonstrated modest performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 70.4%. Conclusions: This study reaffirms the significance of combatting therapeutic inertia in managing T2DM patients. Early insulinization, when clinically appropriate, markedly enhances patients' metabolic goals at the 12-month follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Background Achieving and maintaining adequate glycaemic control is critical to reduce diabetes‐related complications. Therapeutic inertia is one of the leading causes of suboptimal glycaemic control. Aim To assess the degree of inertia in insulin initiation and intensification in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM‐2). Methods We performed a retrospective longitudinal cohort study and followed DM‐2 2 years before and 2 years after the start of insulin. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved glycaemic targets (HBA1c ≤ 7.5%) at 6th month, 1st year and 2nd year. Results We included 374 predominantly male subjects (62%). The mean age was 55.3 ± 11.3 years, the mean duration of DM‐2 was 12.0 ± 7.3 years, 64.4% were obese, 47.6% had a microvascular disease, and 24.3% had a macrovascular disease. The mean HBA1c at −2nd year and −1st year was 9.2 ± 2.1% and 9.3 ± 2.0%, respectively. The mean HbA1C at the time of insulin initiation was 10.4 ± 2.1%. The mean HBA1c at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 8.5 ± 1.8%, 8.4 ± 1.8% and 8.5 ± 1.7%, respectively. The proportion of subjects who achieved HBA1c targets at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 32.9%, 31.0% and 32.9%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that achieving HBA1c targets at 6th month and 1st year increases the odds of achieving HBA1c targets at 2nd year (OR 4.87 [2.4–9.6] p

ABSTRACT Aims/Introduction Delayed intensification of treatment, or therapeutic inertia, increases the risk of diabetic complications and death. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of mandatory monthly outpatient visits on therapeutic inertia in patients with suboptimal control of type 2 diabetes. Materials and Methods This retrospective cohort study used data from the Chang Gung Research Database and defined two study periods: the baseline period and the intervention period. The intervention period began when the Kaohsiung branch initiated a mandatory monthly outpatient visits program. Type 2 diabetes patients with baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7% and a follow‐up HbA1c measurement were enrolled in each period, and divided into a Kaohsiung branch (intervention) group and the other branches (control) group. Therapy intensification was evaluated by comparing prescriptions after the follow‐up HbA1c measurement with the prescriptions after the baseline HbA1c measurement. Results A total of 5,045 patients at the Kaohsiung branch and 13,400 participants at other branches were enrolled in the baseline period; and 5,573 and 15,603 patients, respectively, were enrolled in the intervention period. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for therapy intensification in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥9% was not significantly higher at 1.21 (95% CI, 1.00–1.47) in the intervention period at the Kaohsiung branch, but was significantly higher (AOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02–2.30) in the subgroup with worsened HbA1c. Conclusions Mandatory monthly outpatient visits could improve therapeutic inertia in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, especially in those with worsened control. The trajectory of HbA1c could significantly influence the assessment of the prevalence of therapeutic inertia.

Background: International guidelines for diabetes care emphasize the urgency of promptly achieving and sustaining adequate glycemic control to reduce the occurrence of micro/macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, data from the Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists (AMD) Annals reveal that only 47% of T2DM patients reach appropriate glycemic targets, with approximately 30% relying on insulin therapy, either solely or in combination. This artificial intelligence analysis seeks to assess the potential impact of timely insulin initiation in all eligible patients via a “what-if” scenario simulation, leveraging real-world data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized the AMD Annals database, comprising 1,186,247 T2DM patients from 2005 to 2019. Employing the Logic Learning Machine (LLM), we simulated timely insulin use for all eligible patients, estimating its effect on glycemic control after 12 months within a cohort of 85,239 patients. Of these, 20,015 were employed for the machine learning phase and 65,224 for simulation. Results: Within the simulated scenario, the introduction of appropriate insulin therapy led to a noteworthy projected 17% increase in patients meeting the metabolic target after 12 months from therapy initiation within the cohort of 65,224 individuals. The LLM’s projection envisages 32,851 potential patients achieving the target (hemoglobin glycated < 7.5%) after 12 months, compared to 21,453 patients observed in real-world cases. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for this model demonstrated modest performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 70.4%. Conclusions: This study reaffirms the significance of combatting therapeutic inertia in managing T2DM patients. Early insulinization, when clinically appropriate, markedly enhances patients’ metabolic goals at the 12-month follow-up.

Background: Patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) require close follow-up, support, and education to achieve glycemic control, especially during the initiation or intensification of insulin therapy and self-care management. This study aimed to describe and evaluate the impact of implementing a hybrid model of in-person and telemedicine care and education on glycemic control for patients with uncontrolled T2DM (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ?9%) during the coronavirus disease pandemic. Methods: This prospective multicenter-cohort pre-/post-intervention study was conducted on patients with uncontrolled T2DM. This study included three chronic illness centers affiliated with the Family and Community Medicine Department at Prince Sultan Military Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A hybrid model of in-person (onsite) and telemedicine care and education was developed. This involved implementing initial in-person care at the physicians' clinic and initial in-person education at the diabetes education clinic, followed by telemedicine services of tele-follow-ups, support, and education for an average 4-month follow-up period. Results: Of the enrolled 181 patients, more than half of the participants were women (n?=?103, 56.9%). The mean age of participants (standard deviation) was 58.64???11.23 years and the mean duration of diabetes mellitus was 13.80???8.55 years. The majority of the patients (n?=?144; 79.6%) were on insulin therapy. Overall, in all three centers, the hybrid model had significantly reduced HbA1c from 10.47???1.23% to 7.87???1.59% (mean difference of reduction 2.59% [95% confidence interval (CI)?=?2.34?2.85%], p?0.001). At the level of each center, HbA1c was reduced significantly with mean differences of 3.17% (95% CI?=?2.81?3.53%), 2.49% (95% CI?=?1.92?3.06%), and 2.16% (95% CI?=?1.76?2.57%) at centers A, B, and C, respectively (all p?

Insulin is an essential drug in the treatment of diabetes, often necessary for managing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It should be considered in cases of severe hyperglycemia requiring hospitalization, after the failure of other treatments, in advanced chronic kidney disease, liver cirrhosis, post-transplant diabetes, or during pregnancy. Moreover, in specific patient subgroups, early initiation of insulin is crucial for hyperglycemia control and prevention of chronic complications. Clinical guidelines recommend initiating insulin when other treatments fail, although there are barriers that may delay its initiation. The timing of initiation depends on individual patient characteristics. Typically, insulinization starts by adding basal insulin to the patient’s existing treatment and, if necessary, progresses by gradually introducing prandial insulin. Several barriers have been identified that hinder the initiation of insulin, including fear of hypoglycemia, lack of adherence, the need for glucose monitoring, the injection method of insulin administration, social rejection associated with the stigma of injections, weight gain, a sense of therapeutic failure at initiation, lack of experience among some healthcare professionals, and the delayed and reactive positioning of insulin in recent clinical guidelines. These barriers contribute, among other factors, to therapeutic inertia in initiating and intensifying insulin treatment and to patients’ non-adherence. In this context, the development of once-weekly insulin formulations could improve initial acceptance, adherence, treatment satisfaction, and consequently, the quality of life for patients. Currently, two once-weekly basal insulins, insulin icodec and basal insulin BIF, which are in different stages of clinical development, may help. Their longer half-life translates to lower variability and reduced risk of hypoglycemia. This review addresses the need for insulin in T2DM, its positioning in clinical guidelines under specific circumstances, the current barriers to initiating and intensifying insulin treatment, and the potential role of once-weekly insulin formulations as a potential solution to facilitate timely initiation of insulinization, which would reduce therapeutic inertia and achieve better early control in people with T2DM.

Objectives Clinical inertia, or therapeutic inertia (TI), is the medical behaviour of not initiating or intensifying treatment when recommended by clinical recommendations. To our knowledge, our survey is the first to assess TI around psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods Eight hundred and twenty-five French rheumatologists were contacted via email between January and March 2021 and invited to complete an online questionnaire consisting of seven clinical vignettes: five cases ('oligoarthritis', 'enthesitis', 'polyarthritis', 'neoplastic history', 'cardiovascular risk') requiring treatment OPTImization, and two 'control' cases (distal interphalangeal arthritis, atypical axial involvement) not requiring any change of treatment—according to the most recent PsA recommendations. Rheumatologists were also questioned about their routine practice, continuing medical education and perception of PsA. Results One hundred and one rheumatologists completed this OPTI'PsA survey. Almost half the respondents (47%) demonstrated TI on at least one of the five vignettes that warranted treatment optimization. The complex profiles inducing the most TI were 'oligoarthritis' and 'enthesitis' with 20% and 19% of respondents not modifying treatment, respectively. Conversely, clinical profiles for which there was the least uncertainty ('polyarthritis in relapse', 'neoplastic history' and 'cardiovascular risk') generated less TI with 11%, 8% and 6% of respondents, respectively, choosing not to change the current treatment. Conclusion The rate of TI we observed for PsA is similar to published data for other chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, gout or multiple sclerosis. Our study is the first to show marked clinical inertia in PsA, and further research is warranted to ascertain the reasons behind this inertia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Despite global recommendations for type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment to maintain optimal glycaemic targets, a significant proportion of people remain in suboptimal glycaemic control. Our objective was to investigate the impact of intensification delay after basal insulin (BI) initiation on long‐term complications in people with suboptimal glycaemia. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiated on BI. Those with suboptimal glycaemia (glycated haemoglobin ≥7% or ≥53 mmol/mol) within 12 months of BI initiation were divided into early (treatment intensified within 5 years), or late (≥5 years) intensification groups. We estimated the age‐stratified risks of micro‐ and macrovascular complications among these groups compared with those with optimal glycaemia (glycated haemoglobin <7%). Results: Of the 13 916 people with suboptimal glycaemia, 52.5% (n = 7304) did not receive any treatment intensification. In those aged <65 years, compared with the optimal glycaemia group late intensification was associated with a 56% higher risk of macrovascular complications (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56; 95% confidence intervals 1.08, 2.26). In elderly people (≥65 years), late intensification was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular‐related death (1.62; 1.03, 2.54) and a lower risk of microvascular complications (0.26; 0.08, 0.83). Conclusions: Those who had late intensification were at an increased risk of cardiovascular death if they were ≥65 years and an increased risk of macrovascular complications if they were <65 years. These findings highlight the critical need for earlier intensification of treatment and adopting personalized treatment strategies to improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims/Introduction: Delayed intensification of treatment, or therapeutic inertia, increases the risk of diabetic complications and death. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of mandatory monthly outpatient visits on therapeutic inertia in patients with suboptimal control of type 2 diabetes. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used data from the Chang Gung Research Database and defined two study periods: the baseline period and the intervention period. The intervention period began when the Kaohsiung branch initiated a mandatory monthly outpatient visits program. Type 2 diabetes patients with baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7% and a follow‐up HbA1c measurement were enrolled in each period, and divided into a Kaohsiung branch (intervention) group and the other branches (control) group. Therapy intensification was evaluated by comparing prescriptions after the follow‐up HbA1c measurement with the prescriptions after the baseline HbA1c measurement. Results: A total of 5,045 patients at the Kaohsiung branch and 13,400 participants at other branches were enrolled in the baseline period; and 5,573 and 15,603 patients, respectively, were enrolled in the intervention period. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for therapy intensification in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥9% was not significantly higher at 1.21 (95% CI, 1.00–1.47) in the intervention period at the Kaohsiung branch, but was significantly higher (AOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02–2.30) in the subgroup with worsened HbA1c. Conclusions: Mandatory monthly outpatient visits could improve therapeutic inertia in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, especially in those with worsened control. The trajectory of HbA1c could significantly influence the assessment of the prevalence of therapeutic inertia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study aimed to address therapeutic inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) by investigating the potential of early treatment with oral semaglutide. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted between October 2021 and April 2022 among specialists treating individuals with T2D. A scientific committee designed a data collection form covering demographics, cardiovascular risk, glucose control metrics, ongoing therapies, and physician judgments on treatment appropriateness. Participants completed anonymous patient questionnaires reflecting routine clinical encounters. The preferred therapeutic regimen for each patient was also identified. Results: The analysis was conducted on 4449 patients initiating oral semaglutide. The population had a relatively short disease duration (42% < 5 years), and a minority (15.6%) had a history of cardiovascular events. Importantly, oral semaglutide was started in subjects with various disease durations and background therapies. Notably, its initiation was accompanied by de-prescription of sulfonylureas, pioglitazone, DPP-4 inhibitors, and insulin. Choice of oral semaglutide was influenced by patient profiles and ongoing glucose-lowering regimens. Factors such as younger age, higher HbA1c, and ongoing SGLT-2 inhibitor therapy drove the choice of oral semaglutide with the aim of improving glycemic control. Projected glycemic effectiveness analysis revealed that oral semaglutide could potentially lead HbA1c to target in > 60% of patients, and more often than sitagliptin or empagliflozin. Conclusion: The study supports the potential of early implementation of oral semaglutide as a strategy to overcome therapeutic inertia and enhance T2D management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This systematic literature review (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022327974) examined the duration of uncontrolled hyperglycemia (glycated hemoglobin [HbA 1c ] ≥ 7.0%; ≥ 53 mmol/mol) before basal insulin initiation in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes who were receiving concomitant oral glucose-lowering agents or injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy. Databases (Embase and MEDLINE) were searched to identify relevant articles published between January 1, 2001, and April 19, 2023. Supplementary searches were completed for relevant congresses between 2018 and 2023. Of the 4260 de-duplicated publications identified, 18 eligible publications (conducted in: Europe, n = 5; USA, n = 8; Asia/Middle East, n = 4; and Africa, n = 1) reported time spent with HbA 1c 7.0% or higher (≥ 53 mmol/mol). Overall, time in uncontrolled hyperglycemia ranged from 1.9 months to 86.4 months (Europe, 9.0–86.4 months; USA, 1.9–58.3 months; Asia/Middle East, 3.3–40.1 months; Africa, 36 months). There is a widespread delay in insulin treatment initiation in clinical practice. This delay exists despite availability of novel insulin types and the development of evidence-based treatment guidelines, suggesting that further efforts are needed to improve implementation of these guidelines in clinical practice. • People with T2D have ≤ 86 months uncontrolled hyperglycemia before starting insulin. • Insulin initiation delay was shorter with higher than with lower HbA 1c thresholds. • Delays in insulin initiation more commonly occur in primary than specialist care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and objectiveLimited information is available on how neurologists make therapeutic decisions in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), especially when new treatments with different mechanisms of action, administration, and safety profile are being approved. Decision-making can be complex under this uncertainty and may lead to therapeutic inertia (TI), which refers to lack of treatment initiation or intensification when therapeutic goals are not met. The study aim was to assess neurologists’ TI in NMOSD.MethodsAn online, cross-sectional study was conducted in collaboration with the Spanish Society of Neurology. Neurologists answered a survey composed of demographic characteristics, professional background, and behavioral traits. TI was defined as the lack of initiation or intensification with high-efficacy treatments when there is evidence of disease activity and was assessed through five NMOSD aquaporin-4 positive (AQP4+) simulated case scenarios. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between neurologists’ characteristics and TI.ResultsA total of 78 neurologists were included (median interquartile range [IQR] age: 36.0 [29.0–46.0] years, 55.1% male, median [IQR] experience managing demyelinating conditions was 5.2 [3.0–11.1] years). The majority of participants were general neurologists (59.0%) attending a median (IQR) of 5.0 NMOSD patients (3.0–12.0) annually. Thirty participants (38.5%) were classified as having TI. Working in a low complexity hospital and giving high importance to patient’s tolerability/safety when choosing a treatment were predictors of TI.ConclusionTI is a common phenomenon among neurologists managing NMOSD AQP4+. Identifying TI and implementing specific intervention strategies may be critical to improving therapeutic decisions and patient care.

Background: Therapeutic inertia may be one of the factors responsible for inadequate asthma control. However, the magnitude of therapeutic inertia in asthmatic patients has not yet been determined. In Ethiopia, a result showed that more than half of people with asthma had uncontrolled asthma. Objectives: to assess the prevalence of therapeutic inertia and its determinant factors among patients on bronchial Asthma management. Methodology: An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted on adult asthmatic patients attending the chronic follow-up department at Jimma University Medical College. A consecutive sampling with an interviewer-administered questionnaire and patient chart review was performed. Results: Therapeutic inertia was identified in 63 (47.7%) study subjects. The associated factors among patients on bronchial asthma management were poor adherence to medications prescribed by a doctor (p-value= 0.013; AOR 5.9; 95% CI 1.5-23.9), no regular follow-up (p-value=0.010; AOR 9.766; 95% CI 1.727-55.216), mild persistent chronic asthma (p-value

Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) and therapeutic inertia pose significant challenges in effectively managing hypertension. This study objective was to quantify levels of uncontrolled BP and therapeutic inertia among patients treated for hypertension in primary care. This retrospective cohort study used data recorded by general practitioners from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink database. Adults with primary hypertension who received a recorded prescription for any antihypertensive drug between January 2015 and June 2017 (index date) were included, with a follow‐up of 18 months. Primary outcomes included the percentage of patients with uncontrolled BP (defined as systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg) and of apparent therapeutic inertia (defined as two consecutive uncontrolled BP records without treatment change) during follow‐up. Finally, of 581 260 patients receiving antihypertensive drug(s), 37.2% (n = 216 014) had uncontrolled BP at the index date and 30.3% (n = 175 955) had no record of BP at this date. During follow‐up, 59.2% had ≥1 record of uncontrolled BP, in 22% all records showed uncontrolled BP, and 12.8% had no record of BP. Among those with uncontrolled BP at the index date, 72.9% had ≥1 record of uncontrolled BP during follow‐up, and in 28.3% all records showed uncontrolled BP. Therapeutic inertia was observed in 33.1% of patients overall, and in 55.7% of those with uncontrolled BP at the index date. In conclusion, BP recording was infrequent, possibly reflecting both a low frequency of measurement and potential under‐recording. Uncontrolled BP and therapeutic inertia appear to be widespread in UK general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction The current therapeutic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is evolving rapidly. Our treatment options include new anti-amyloid-β protein disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) that decrease cognitive decline in patients with early AD (prodromal and mild AD dementia). Despite these advances, we have limited information on how neurologists would apply the results of recent DMT trials to make treatment decisions. Our goal is to identify factors associated with the use of new AD DMTs among neurologists applying concepts from behavioral economics. Methods This non-interventional, cross-sectional, web-based study will assess 400 neurologists with expertise in AD from across Spain. Participants will start by completing demographic information, practice settings, and a behavioral battery to address their tolerance to uncertainty and risk preferences. Participants will then be presented with 10 simulated case scenarios or vignettes of common encounters in patients with early AD to evaluate treatment initiation with anti-amyloid-β DMTs (e.g., aducanumab, lecanemab, etc.). The primary outcomes will be therapeutic inertia and suboptimal decisions. Discrete choice experiments will be used to determine the weight of factors influencing treatment choices. Results The results of this study will provide new insights into a better understanding of the most relevant factors associated with therapeutic decisions on the use of DMTs, assessing how neurologists handle uncertainty when making treatment choices, and identifying the prevalence of therapeutic inertia in the management of early AD.

Clinical inertia is very common in day-to-day practice, and the factors contributing to that can be physician-related, patient-related, or health-care-related. Clinical inertia is commonly described in chronic asymptomatic illness. We searched the PubMed and Scopus databases for original articles and reviews. Based on the search result, in this review article, we redefine various terminologies to avoid confusion and propose classification criteria for the early identification of clinical inertia. Clinical inertia is also present in acute illness and in symptomatic disease. Early identification of clinical inertia is difficult because of very vague terminologies which have been used interchangeably as well as because of the lack of definitive classification criteria. In this article, we redefine clinical inertia and propose criteria for early identification, which will be useful for both clinicians and academicians. This review will help clinicians to identify and rectify various aspects of clinical inertia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The current therapeutic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is evolving rapidly. Our treatment options include new anti-amyloid-β protein disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) that decrease cognitive decline in patients with early AD (prodromal and mild AD dementia). Despite these advances, we have limited information on how neurologists would apply the results of recent DMT trials to make treatment decisions. Our goal is to identify factors associated with the use of new AD DMTs among neurologists applying concepts from behavioral economics. Methods: This non-interventional, cross-sectional, web-based study will assess 400 neurologists with expertise in AD from across Spain. Participants will start by completing demographic information, practice settings, and a behavioral battery to address their tolerance to uncertainty and risk preferences. Participants will then be presented with 10 simulated case scenarios or vignettes of common encounters in patients with early AD to evaluate treatment initiation with anti-amyloid-β DMTs (e.g., aducanumab, lecanemab, etc.). The primary outcomes will be therapeutic inertia and suboptimal decisions. Discrete choice experiments will be used to determine the weight of factors influencing treatment choices. Results: The results of this study will provide new insights into a better understanding of the most relevant factors associated with therapeutic decisions on the use of DMTs, assessing how neurologists handle uncertainty when making treatment choices, and identifying the prevalence of therapeutic inertia in the management of early AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Severe asthma treatment with oral corticosteroids (OCS) added to inhaled corticosteroids and a long-acting β2-agonist (ICS-LABA) may result in more treatment burden and increased adverse effects. This ambispective multicenter observational study aimed at describing the clinical burden in patients with severe asthma on stable high-dose ICS-LABA who received OCS during ≥6 months (maintenance group) or ≥2 cycles in the previous 12 months (bursts group). Data collection comprised a retrospective 12-month baseline period and 2 follow-up visits at 3 and 6 months. Eighty-nine patients were evaluable (30 on maintenance, 59 on bursts). At baseline, mean (SD) daily prednisone equivalent exposure in the total population was 24.6 (14.7) mg: 13.8 (9.4) mg on maintenance and 29.9 (14.3) mg on bursts. During the 6-month follow-up period, mean (SD) daily dose in the total cohort was 22.5 (18.8) mg: 17.2 (18.6) mg on maintenance and 28.4 (20.6) mg on bursts. The overall annual severe exacerbations rate during the 12-month baseline period was 2.05 per patient-year and 1.5 per patient-year over the 6-month follow-up, and frequency of hospitalizations and emergency department visits were similar on both maintenance and bursts use. Results show a suboptimal control of severe asthma despite such high doses of OCS and persistence of disease burden regardless of the prescribing pattern in maintenance or bursts. There is therapeutic inertia to continue using OCS despite the increased risk of adverse effects and the availability of biologics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To determine the extent of therapeutic inertia related to the weekly injectable glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists dulaglutide and semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the United Kingdom. Materials and methods: Adults with T2D who received their first primary care prescription of dulaglutide or semaglutide between January and July 2019 were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD primary care database. Doses prescribed, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body mass index (BMI) and concomitant T2D medications were assessed at first prescription and at 3, 6 and 9 months. Results: Of the patients prescribed dulaglutide (N = 748; mean [SD] age 59.0 [11.2] years) and semaglutide (N = 437; mean [SD] age 58.4 [10.6] years), 93.0% and 89.0%, respectively, had an HbA1c level ≥7.5% (≥58.46 mmol/mol), and 56.4% and 54.9%, respectively, had an HbA1c level ≥9.0% (≥74.86 mmol/mol), at first prescription. At 6 to 9 months, 75.0% of those on dulaglutide 0.75 mg and 57.6% of those on semaglutide 0.25 mg or 0.5 mg had an HbA1c level ≥7.5% (≥58.46 mmol/mol). At 9 months, 21.9% of the dulaglutide cohort were on the suboptimal dose of 0.75 mg, and 46.1% of the semaglutide cohort were on the suboptimal doses of 0.25 mg or 0.5 mg. Conclusions: Multiple examples of therapeutic inertia were identified, including first prescription at HbA1c levels considerably above target and failure to escalate to optimal doses even with evidence of suboptimal metabolic control. A substantial proportion of patients therefore did not achieve optimal HbA1c targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In type 2 diabetes (T2D), key barriers to optimal glycaemic control include lack of persistence with treatment, reduced medication adherence and therapeutic inertia. This study aimed to assess the impact of these barriers in obese adults with type 2 diabetes treated with a GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) and compare them against other glucose-lowering agents in a real-world setting. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted using electronic medical records from 2014 to 2019 for adults with T2D at the Valencia Clínico-Malvarrosa Department of Health (Valencia, Spain). Four study groups were established: all GLP-1RA users, SGLT2i users, insulin users and other glucose-lowering agent users (miscellany group). To account for imbalance between groups, propensity score matching (PSM) including age, gender and pre-existing cardiovascular disease was performed. Chi-square tests were used for comparisons between groups. Time to first intensification was calculated using competing risk analysis. Results: Among the 26,944 adults with T2D, 7392 individuals were selected following PSM, with 1848 patients in each group. At 2 years, GLP-1RA users were less persistent than non-users (48.4% versus 72.7%, p < 0.0001) but more adherent (73.8% versus 68.9%, respectively, p < 0.0001). A greater proportion of persistent GLP-1RA users than non-persistent users exhibited reduced HbA1c (40.5% versus 18.6%, respectively, p < 0.0001), but no differences in cardiovascular outcomes and death were found. Overall, therapeutic inertia was observed in 38.0% of the study population. The large majority of GLP-1RA users received treatment intensification, whereas only 50.0% of GLP-1RA non-users were intensified. Conclusion: Under real-life conditions, obese adults with T2D persistently treated with GLP-1RA showed improved glycaemic control. Despite benefits, persistence with GLP-1RA was limited after 2 years. Additionally, therapeutic inertia occurred in two out of three study participants. Strategies to facilitate medication adherence, persistence and treatment intensification in people with T2D should be made a priority in order to achieve and maintain glycaemic targets and improve outcomes in this population. Trail registration: Study registered in clinicaltrials.org with the identifier NCT05535322. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The objective of this study is to establish a predictive model using transparent machine learning (ML) to identify any drivers that characterize therapeutic inertia. Methods: Data in the form of both descriptive and dynamic variables collected from electronic records of 1.5 million patients seen at clinics within the Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists between 2005–2019 were analyzed using logic learning machine (LLM), a "clear box" ML technique. Data were subjected to a first stage of modeling to allow ML to automatically select the most relevant factors related to inertia, and then four further modeling steps individuated key variables that discriminated the presence or absence of inertia. Results: The LLM model revealed a key role for average glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) threshold values correlated with the presence or absence of insulin therapeutic inertia with an accuracy of 0.79. The model indicated that a patient's dynamic rather than static glycemic profile has a greater effect on therapeutic inertia. Specifically, the difference in HbA1c between two consecutive visits, what we call the HbA1c gap, plays a crucial role. Namely, insulin therapeutic inertia is correlated with an HbA1c gap of <6.6 mmol/mol (0.6%), but not with an HbA1c gap of >11 mmol/mol (1.0%). Conclusions: The results reveal, for the first time, the interrelationship between a patient's glycemic trend defined by sequential HbA1c measurements and timely or delayed initiation of insulin therapy. The results further demonstrate that LLM can provide insight in support of evidence‐based medicine using real world data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Murlidhar Rajagopalan,1 Sunil Dogra,2 Kiran Godse,3 Bikash Ranjan Kar,4 Sai Krishna Kotla,5 Shekhar Neema,6 Abir Saraswat,7 Swapnil Deepak Shah,8 Nina Madnani,9,10 Vidyadhar Sardesai,11 Rajiv Sekhri,12 Sachin Varma,13 Sandeep Arora,14 Pallavi Kawatra15 1Department of Dermatology, Apollo Hospital, Chennai, India; 2Department of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India; 3DY Patil University School of Medicine, Navi Mumbai, India; 4Department of Dermatology, IMS and SUM Hospital, Bhubaneshwar, Odisha, India; 5Department of Dermatology, Yashodha Hospital, Secunderabad, India; 6Department of Dermatology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India; 7Indushree Skin Clinic, Lucknow, India; 8Department of Dermatology, Ashwini Rural Medical College, Solapur, India; 9Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai, India; 10Sir. H. N. Reliance Hospital, Mumbai, India; 11Bharati Vidyapeeth Medical College, Pune, India; 12Fortis Hospital, Noida, India; 13Skinvita Clinic, Kolkata, West Bengal, India; 14Army College of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India; 15Novartis, Mumbai, IndiaCorrespondence: Murlidhar Rajagopalan, Department of Dermatology, Apollo Hospital, Chennai, India, Email docmurli@gmail.comPurpose: The primary objective of the study was to understand the therapeutic inertia in treatment and management of plaque psoriasis among dermatologists, along with determining the preferred treatment choices for management of plaque psoriasis; it also included the resulting treatment satisfaction among patients. The secondary objective was to identify the gaps in terms of knowledge and attitude among dermatologists and the expectations of patients.Patients and Methods: A multicentre, cross-sectional quantitative survey was conducted among dermatologists and patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis across India. The interviews were conducted either face to face or via telephone between September and November 2020, using structured and validated questionnaires based on specific themes. The data obtained were statistically analysed, wherever applicable.Results: Overall, 207 adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and 303 dermatologists were interviewed. Post experiencing symptoms, 44% of the patients visited general physicians for treatment and there was an average 7.8-month delay by the patients to consult a dermatologist. Approximately one-fourth of patients used home remedies before seeking medical help. One-third of dermatologists used the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) for assessing the disease severity. Majority of dermatologists preferred combination therapy for their patients. The lack of quick resolution and side effects were the major reasons for changing the treatment. Overall, only 35% of the patients complied to current treatment. Satisfaction with existing forms of therapies was highest for mild plaque psoriasis (62%) as confirmed by dermatologists, while 52% of the overall patients were satisfied with their therapy. Majority of the patients (64%) affirmed living with plaque psoriasis impacted their lives.Conclusion: This first-of-its-kind survey in India highlighted the gaps in terms of the disease journey between dermatologists and patients. The survey emphasises the need for shared decision-making and may benefit dermatologists in suggestive modifications of the treatment algorithm and disease management in clinical settings.Keywords: therapeutic inertia, psoriasis, adherence, treatment expectations, treatment goals, diagnosis

A substantial proportion of patients with heart failure (HF) receive suboptimal guideline-recommended therapy. We aimed to identify the factors leading to suboptimal drug prescription in HF and according to HF phenotypes. This retrospective, single-centre observational cohort study included 702 patients admitted for worsening HF (HF with a reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF], n = 198; HF with a mildly reduced EF [HFmrEF], n = 122; and HF with a preserved EF [HFpEF], n = 382). A score based on the prescription and dose percentage of ACEi/ARBs, β-blockers, and MRAs at discharge was calculated (a total score ranging from zero to six). Approximately 70% of patients received ACEi/ARBs/ARNi, 80% of patients received β-blockers, and 20% received MRAs. The mean HF drug dose was approximately 50% of the recommended dose, irrespective of the HF phenotype. Ischaemic heart disease was associated with a higher prescription score (ranging from 0.4 to 1) compared to no history of ischaemic heart disease, irrespective of the left ventricular EF (LVEF) level. A lower prescription score was associated with older age and male sex in HFrEF and diabetes in HFmrEF. The overall ability of the models to predict the optimal drug dose, including key HF variables (including natriuretic peptides at admission), was poor (R2 < 0.25). A higher prescription score was associated with a lower risk of re-hospitalization and death (HR: 0.75 (0.57–0.97), p = 0.03), irrespective of phenotype (p-interaction = 0.41). Despite very different HF management guidelines according to LVEF, the prescription pattern of HF drugs is poorly related to LVEF and clinical characteristics, thus suggesting that physician-driven factors may be involved in the setting of therapeutic inertia. It may also be related to drug intolerance or clinical stability that is not predicted by the patients' profiles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Avec le vieillissement de la population et l'augmentation du nombre de patients ostéoporotiques très âgés à haut risque de chute, le nombre de fractures liées à l'ostéoporose va augmenter de façon très importante dans les années à venir. Malgré des recommandations récentes de prise en charge (risque imminent de récidive fracturaire, fractures sévères), les patients avec ostéoporose, majoritairement des femmes de plus de 60 ans, sont peu nombreux à bénéficier d'un dépistage, même après une fracture. L'urgence est à la prise en charge des patients fracturés (filières fractures, dépistage opportuniste), mais aussi à la prévention primaire (dépistage systématique des femmes à la soixantaine) qui ne peut passer que par une forte implication de nos autorités de santé. The number of fractures related to osteoporosis is expected to increase in the next years because of the aging of the population and an increase in the number of osteoporotic elderly patients at high risk of falls. Few patients with osteoporosis, mostly women over 60, benefit from screening, even after fracture despite recent recommendations (imminent risk for fracture, severe fracture). We needed the involvement of Health Authorities to take care of fractured patients (Fracture Liaison Services, opportunistic osteoporosis screening) but also before fracture (systematic screening of women over 60). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]