Dataset Information

Potential overtreatment of diabetes mellitus in older adults with tight glycemic control.

ABSTRACT: In older adults with multiple serious comorbidities and functional limitations, the harms of intensive glycemic control likely exceed the benefits.To examine glycemic control levels among older adults with diabetes mellitus by health status and to estimate the prevalence of potential overtreatment of diabetes.Cross-sectional analysis of the data on 1288 older adults (?65 years) with diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 through 2010 who had a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement. All analyses incorporated complex survey design to produce nationally representative estimates.Health status categories: very complex/poor, based on difficulty with 2 or more activities of daily living or dialysis dependence; complex/intermediate, based on difficulty with 2 or more instrumental activities of daily living or presence of 3 or more chronic conditions; and relatively healthy if none of these were present.Tight glycemic control (HbA1c level, <7%) and use of diabetes medications likely to result in hypoglycemia (insulin or sulfonylureas).Of 1288 older adults with diabetes, 50.7% (95% CI, 46.6%-54.8%), representing 3.1 million (95% CI, 2.7-3.5), were relatively healthy, 28.1% (95% CI, 24.8%-31.5%), representing 1.7 million (95% CI, 1.4-2.0), had complex/intermediate health, and 21.2% (95% CI, 18.3%-24.4%), representing 1.3 million (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), had very complex/poor health. Overall, 61.5% (95% CI, 57.5%-65.3%), representing 3.8 million (95% CI, 3.4-4.2), had an HbA1c level of less than 7%; this proportion did not differ across health status categories (62.8% [95% CI, 56.9%-68.3%]) were relatively healthy, 63.0% (95% CI, 57.0%-68.6%) had complex/intermediate health, and 56.4% (95% CI, 49.7%-62.9%) had very complex/poor health (P?=?.26). Of the older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7%, 54.9% (95% CI, 50.4%-59.3%) were treated with either insulin or sulfonylureas; this proportion was similar across health status categories (50.8% [95% CI, 45.1%-56.5%] were relatively healthy, 58.7% [95% CI, 49.4%-67.5%] had complex/intermediate health, and 60.0% [95% CI, 51.4%-68.1%] had very complex/poor health; P?=?.14). During the 10 study years, there were no significant changes in the proportion of older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7% (P?=?.34), the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who had complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P?=?.27), or the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas despite having complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P?=?.65).Although the harms of intensive treatment likely exceed the benefits for older patients with complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health status, most of these adults reached tight glycemic targets between 2001 and 2010. Most of them were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, which may lead to severe hypoglycemia. Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion of older adults with diabetes were potentially overtreated.

SUBMITTER: Lipska KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4426991 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Potential overtreatment of diabetes mellitus in older adults with tight glycemic control.

Lipska Kasia J KJ Ross Joseph S JS Miao Yinghui Y Shah Nilay D ND Lee Sei J SJ Steinman Michael A MA

JAMA internal medicine 20150301 3

<h4>Importance</h4>In older adults with multiple serious comorbidities and functional limitations, the harms of intensive glycemic control likely exceed the benefits.<h4>Objectives</h4>To examine glycemic control levels among older adults with diabetes mellitus by health status and to estimate the prevalence of potential overtreatment of diabetes.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>Cross-sectional analysis of the data on 1288 older adults (≥65 years) with diabetes from the National Health ...[more]

PMID: 25581565

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn multicenter studies, tight glycemic control targeting a normal blood glucose level has not been shown to improve outcomes in critically ill adults or children after cardiac surgery. Studies involving critically ill children who have not undergone cardiac surgery are lacking.MethodsIn a 35-center trial, we randomly assigned critically ill children with confirmed hyperglycemia (excluding patients who had undergone cardiac surgery) to one of two ranges of glycemic control: 80 to 110 mg per deciliter (4.4 to 6.1 mmol per liter; lower-target group) or 150 to 180 mg per deciliter (8.3 to 10.0 mmol per liter; higher-target group). Clinicians were guided by continuous glucose monitoring and explicit methods for insulin adjustment. The primary outcome was the number of intensive care unit (ICU)-free days to day 28.ResultsThe trial was stopped early, on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board, owing to a low likelihood of benefit and evidence of the possibility of harm. Of 713 patients, 360 were randomly assigned to the lower-target group and 353 to the higher-target group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median number of ICU-free days did not differ significantly between the lower-target group and the higher-target group (19.4 days [interquartile range {IQR}, 0 to 24.2] and 19.4 days [IQR, 6.7 to 23.9], respectively; P=0.58). In per-protocol analyses, the median time-weighted average glucose level was significantly lower in the lower-target group (109 mg per deciliter [IQR, 102 to 118]; 6.1 mmol per liter [IQR, 5.7 to 6.6]) than in the higher-target group (123 mg per deciliter [IQR, 108 to 142]; 6.8 mmol per liter [IQR, 6.0 to 7.9]; P<0.001). Patients in the lower-target group also had higher rates of health care-associated infections than those in the higher-target group (12 of 349 patients [3.4%] vs. 4 of 349 [1.1%], P=0.04), as well as higher rates of severe hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose level below 40 mg per deciliter (2.2 mmol per liter) (18 patients [5.2%] vs. 7 [2.0%], P=0.03). No significant differences were observed in mortality, severity of organ dysfunction, or the number of ventilator-free days.ConclusionsCritically ill children with hyperglycemia did not benefit from tight glycemic control targeted to a blood glucose level of 80 to 110 mg per deciliter, as compared with a level of 150 to 180 mg per deciliter. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; HALF-PINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01565941 .).

Project description:ImportanceThere is substantial uncertainty about optimal glycemic control in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.ObservationsFour large randomized clinical trials (RCTs), ranging in size from 1791 to 11,440 patients, provide the majority of the evidence used to guide diabetes therapy. Most RCTs of intensive vs standard glycemic control excluded adults older than 80 years, used surrogate end points to evaluate microvascular outcomes and provided limited data on which subgroups are most likely to benefit or be harmed by specific therapies. Available data from randomized clinical trials suggest that intensive glycemic control does not reduce major macrovascular events in older adults for at least 10 years. Furthermore, intensive glycemic control does not lead to improved patient-centered microvascular outcomes for at least 8 years. Data from randomized clinical trials consistently suggest that intensive glycemic control immediately increases the risk of severe hypoglycemia 1.5- to 3-fold. Based on these data and observational studies, for the majority of adults older than 65 years, the harms associated with a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target lower than 7.5% or higher than 9% are likely to outweigh the benefits. However, the optimal target depends on patient factors, medications used to reach the target, life expectancy, and patient preferences about treatment. If only medications with low treatment burden and hypoglycemia risk (such as metformin) are required, a lower HbA1c target may be appropriate. If patients strongly prefer to avoid injections or frequent fingerstick monitoring, a higher HbA1c target that obviates the need for insulin may be appropriate.Conclusions and relevanceHigh-quality evidence about glycemic treatment in older adults is lacking. Optimal decisions need to be made collaboratively with patients, incorporating the likelihood of benefits and harms and patient preferences about treatment and treatment burden. For the majority of older adults, an HbA1c target between 7.5% and 9% will maximize benefits and minimize harms.

Dataset Information

Potential overtreatment of diabetes mellitus in older adults with tight glycemic control.

Publications

Potential overtreatment of diabetes mellitus in older adults with tight glycemic control.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets