1. Home
  2. blood glucose

blood glucose

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019 Abridged for Primary Care Providers

Author/s: 
American Diabetes Association

The American Diabetes Association’s (ADA’s) Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes is updated and published annually in a supplement to the January issue of Diabetes Care. The ADA’s Professional Practice Committee, which includes physicians, diabetes educators, registered dietitians (RDs), and public health experts, develops the Standards. The Standards include the most current evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating adults and children with all forms of diabetes. ADA’s grading system uses A, B, C, or E to show the evidence level that supports each recommendation.

  • A—Clear evidence from well-conducted, generalizable randomized controlled trials that are adequately powered

  • B—Supportive evidence from well-conducted cohort studies

  • C—Supportive evidence from poorly controlled or uncontrolled studies

  • E—Expert consensus or clinical experience

This is an abridged version of the 2019 Standards containing the evidence-based recommendations most pertinent to primary care. The tables and figures have been renumbered from the original document to match this version. The complete 2019 Standards of Care document, including all supporting references, is available at professional.diabetes.org/standards.

Keywords 
standard of care guidelines diabetes diabetes, type 2 A1C

Psyllium fiber improves glycemic control proportional to loss of glycemic control: a meta-analysis of data in euglycemic subjects, patients at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and patients being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Author/s: 
Gibb, Roger D., McRorie, Johnson W., Russell, Darrell A., Hasselblad, Vic, D'Alessio, David A.

BACKGROUND:

A number of health benefits are associated with intake of soluble, viscous, gel-forming fibers, including reduced serum cholesterol and the attenuation of postprandial glucose excursions.

OBJECTIVE:

We assess the effects of psyllium, which is a soluble, gel-forming, nonfermented fibersupplement, on glycemic control in patients who were being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and in patients who were at risk of developing T2DM.

DESIGN:

A comprehensive search was performed of available published literature (Scopus scientific database) and clinical records stored by Procter & Gamble with the use of key search terms to identify clinical studies that assessed the glycemic effects of psyllium in nondiabetic, pre-T2DM, and T2DM patients.

RESULTS:

We identified 35 randomized, controlled, clinical studies that spanned 3 decades and 3 continents. These data were assessed in 8 meta-analyses. In patients with T2DM, multiweek studies (psyllium dosed before meals) showed significant improvement in both the fasting blood glucose (FBG) concentration (-37.0 mg/dL; P < 0.001) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) [-0.97% (-10.6 mmol/mol); P = 0.048]. Glycemic effects were proportional to baseline FBG; no significant glucose lowering was observed in euglycemic subjects, a modest improvement was observed in subjects with pre-T2DM, and the greatest improvement was observed in subjects who were being treated for T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS:

These data indicate that psyllium would be an effective addition to a lifestyle-intervention program. The degree of psyllium's glycemic benefit was commensurate with the loss of glycemic control. Because the greatest effect was seen in patients who were being treated for T2DM, additional studies are needed to determine how best to incorporate psyllium into existing prevention and treatment algorithms with concomitant hypoglycemic medications.

Keywords 
diabetes fiber glycemic glycemic control meta-analysis metabolic syndrome psyllium type 2 diabetes

Choosing Wisely - 5 Things Physicians & Patients Should Question

Author/s: 
Subramanian, Usha, Burger, Alfred, Bailey, Jim, Gleason, Nathaniel, Pahwa, Amit

Don’t recommend daily home finger glucose testing in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus not using insulin.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is an integral part of patient self-management in maintaining safe and target-driven glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, daily finger glucose testing has no benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not on insulin or medications associated with hypoglycemia, and small, but significant, patient harms are associated with daily glucose testing. SMBG should be reserved for patients during the titration of their medication doses or during periods of changes in patients’ diet and exercise routines.

Keywords 
diabetes home blood glucose monitoring insulin

Effect of glycaemic control on cardiovascular disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes with pre-existing cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author/s: 
Barer, Yael, Cohen, Ohad, Cukierman-Yaffe, Tali

The role of intensive glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) is controversial. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to determine in a subset of people with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, the CV effect of intensive glucose control versus standard of care. We searched Medline, the Cochrane library, EMBASE and the National Institutes of Health Trial registration database for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of intensive glucose control versus standard glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes on incident CVD. Data were extracted using a structured form. When data were not available in the publications, authors were contacted. Eight trials involving 8339 participants were included. Among adults with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, there was no difference in the risk of CV events in those allocated to intensive glucose control compared with those in the standard care arm (relative risk 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.87‐1.09). In conclusion, in people with diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, intensive glucose control versus standard care had a neutral effect on incident CV events.

Keywords 
cardiovascular disease glucose control intensive type 2 diabetes

Glucose Self-monitoring in Non–Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care Settings

Author/s: 
Young, Laura A., Buse, John B., Weaver, Mark A., Vu, Maihan B., Mitchell, C. Madeline, Blakeney, Tamara, Grimm, Kimberlea, Rees, Jennifer, Niblock, Franklin, Donahue, Katrina E.

IMPORTANCE:

The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) levels in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes has been debated.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare 3 approaches of SMBG for effects on hemoglobin A1c levels and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among people with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes in primary care practice.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

The Monitor Trial study was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial conducted in 15 primary care practices in central North Carolina. Participants were randomized between January 2014 and July 2015. Eligible patients with type 2 non-insulin-treated diabetes were: older than 30 years, established with a primary care physician at a participating practice, had glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c) levels higher than 6.5% but lower than 9.5% within the 6 months preceding screening, as obtained from the electronic medical record, and willing to comply with the results of random assignment into a study group. Of the 1032 assessed for eligibility, 450 were randomized.

INTERVENTIONS:

No SMBG, once-daily SMBG, and once-daily SMBG with enhanced patient feedback including automatic tailored messages delivered via the meter.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

Coprimary outcomes included hemoglobin A1c levels and HRQOL at 52 weeks.

RESULTS:

A total of 450 patients were randomized and 418 (92.9%) completed the final visit. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c levels across all 3 groups (P = .74; estimated adjusted mean hemoglobin A1c difference, SMBG with messaging vs no SMBG, -0.09%; 95% CI, -0.31% to 0.14%; SMBG vs no SMBG, -0.05%; 95% CI, -0.27% to 0.17%). There were also no significant differences found in HRQOL. There were no notable differences in key adverse events including hypoglycemia frequency, health care utilization, or insulin initiation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

In patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, we observed no clinically or statistically significant differences at 1 year in glycemic control or HRQOL between patients who performed SMBG compared with those who did not perform SMBG. The addition of this type of tailored feedback provided through messaging via a meter did not provide any advantage in glycemic control.

Keywords 
type 2 diabetes blood glucose quality of life

Health Economic Benefits and Quality of Life During Improved Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Author/s: 
Testa, Marcia A., Simonson, Donald C.

CONTEXT:

Although the long-term health benefits of good glycemic control in patients with diabetes are well documented, shorter-term quality of life (QOL) and economic savings generally have been reported to be minimal or absent.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine short-term outcomes of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM).

DESIGN:

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial.

SETTING:

Sixty-two sites in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS:

A total of 569 male and female volunteers with type 2 DM.

INTERVENTION:

After a 3-week, single-blind placebo-washout period, participants were randomized to diet and titration with either 5 to 20 mg of glipizide gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 377) or placebo (n = 192) for 12 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Change from baseline in glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and symptom distress, QOL, and health economic indicators by questionnaires and diaries.

RESULTS:

After 12 weeks, mean (+/-SE) HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels decreased with active therapy (glipizide GITS) vs placebo (7.5% 0.1% vs 9.3%+/-0.1% and 7.0+/-0.1 mmol/L [126+/-2 mg/dL] vs 9.3+/-0.2 mmol/L [168+/-4 mg/ dL], respectively; P<.001). Quality-of-life treatment differences (SD units) for symptom distress (+0.59; P<.001), general perceived health (+0.36; P= .004), cognitive functioning (+0.34; P=.005), and the overall visual analog scale (VAS) (+0.24; P=.04) were significantly more favorable for active therapy. Subscales of acuity (+0.38; P=.002), VAS emotional health (+0.35; P=.003), general health (+0.27; P=.01), sleep (+0.26; P=.04), depression (+0.25; P=.05), disorientation and detachment (+0.23; P= .05), and vitality (+0.22; P=.04) were most affected. Favorable health economic outcomes for glipizide GITS included higher retained employment (97% vs 85%; P<.001), greater productive capacity (99% vs 87%; P<.001), less absenteeism (losses = $24 vs $115 per worker per month; P<.001), fewer bed-days (losses = $1539 vs $1843 per 1000 person-days; P=.05), and fewer restricted-activity days (losses = $2660 vs $4275 per 1000 person-days; P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

Improved glycemic control of type 2 DM is associated with substantial short-term symptomatic, QOL, and health economic benefits.

Keywords 
diabetes blood gluclose
Subscribe to blood glucose