4.5 Article

Is there evidence of potential overtreatment of glycaemia in elderly people with type 2 diabetes? Data from the GUIDANCE study

期刊

ACTA DIABETOLOGICA
卷 54, 期 2, 页码 209-214

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s00592-016-0939-9

关键词

Type 2 diabetes; HbA1c; Hypoglycaemia; Overtreatment

资金

  1. European Association for the Study of Diabetes from a grant from Merck & Co. (Whitehouse Station, NJ)
  2. Diabetes Centre Thuringia, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We used data from the GUIDANCE Study to determine the care of people with type 2 diabetes according to age and accompanying cardiovascular diseases and to assess indicators of overtreatment of glycaemia. The GUIDANCE study was a retrospective, cross-sectional study from 2009-2010 based on the records of 7597 people in France, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, Ireland and Germany. We analysed the level of metabolic control achieved and blood glucose-lowering medication used in different age groups and in relation to accompanying diseases. 4.459 patients (59.1%) were 65 years or older. Their HbA1c levels were similar to those with < 65 years. 44.7% of patients ae65 years had an HbA1c ae7% (53 mmol/mol) and were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, and 27.1% of them had ischaemic heart disease or congestive heart failure. Significantly more patients with heart disease had HbA1c values ae7% (53 mmol/mol) and were treated more often with insulin or sulfonylureas compared to patients of the same age without heart disease. Most patients were treated according to guidelines valid at the time this large international patient sample was surveyed. Older and younger patients were at a similar level of metabolic control, and almost half of the patients with an age of ae65 years and treated with insulin or sulfonylurea had HbA1c levels below the target range (ae7%) for younger patients. However, these patients have an increased risk of severe hypoglycaemic events with potentially dangerous complications, particularly in those with cardiovascular diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据