Persistent poor glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes in developing countries: 12 years of real-world evidence of the International Diabetes Management Practices Study (IDMPS)

Aims/hypothesis We evaluated the secular trend of glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes in developing countries, where data are limited. Methods The International Diabetes Management Practices Study provides real-world evidence of patient profiles and diabetes care practices in developing countries in seven cross-sectional waves (2005-2017). At each wave, each physician collected data from ten consecutive participants with type 2 diabetes during a 2 week period. The primary objective of this analysis was to evaluate trends of glycaemic control over time. Results A total of 66,088 individuals with type 2 diabetes were recruited by 6099 physicians from 49 countries. The proportion of participants with HbA(1c) <53 mmol/mol (<7%) decreased from 36% in wave 1 (2005) to 30.1% in wave 7 (2017) (p < 0.0001). Compared with wave 1, the adjusted ORs of attaining HbA(1c) <= 64 mmol/mol (<= 8%) decreased significantly in waves 2, 5, 6 and 7 (p < 0.05). Over 80% of participants received oral glucose-lowering drugs, with declining use of sulfonylureas. Insulin use increased from 32.8% (wave 1) to 41.2% (wave 7) (p < 0.0001). The corresponding time to insulin initiation (mean +/- SD) changed from 8.4 +/- 6.9 in wave 1 to 8.3 +/- 6.6 years in wave 7, while daily insulin dosage ranged from 0.39 +/- 0.21 U/kg (wave 1) to 0.33 +/- 0.19 U/kg (wave 7) for basal regimen and 0.70 +/- 0.34 U/kg (wave 1) to 0.77 +/- 0.33 (wave 7) U/kg for basal-bolus regimen. An increasing proportion of participants had >= 2 HbA(1c) measurements within 12 months of enrolment (from 61.8% to 92.9%), and the proportion of participants receiving diabetes education (mainly delivered by physicians) also increased from 59.0% to 78.3%. Conclusions In developing countries, glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes remained suboptimal over a 12 year period, indicating a need for system changes and better organisation of care to improve self-management and attainment of treatment goals.