Dataset Information

Glycemic control of people with diabetes over months after the 2018 North Osaka Earthquake.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

On June 18 2018, Japan experienced the North Osaka Earthquake. The shaking intensity was recorded as level 6 of the Japan Meteorological Agency Seismic Intensity Scale. Despite the severe shaking, damages of lifelines and transportation networks were limited, and they were completely recovered within several days. We investigated whether the glycemic control in patients with diabetes was deteriorated over months after the earthquake.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed diabetic outpatients attending the department of Metabolic Medicine, Osaka University Hospital, close to the epicenter of the earthquake, in 2018 (n = 1940), and those in 2017 (n = 1908) as a control. Whether glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels were elevated after the earthquake, and whether the post-earthquake HbA1c elevation was more prevalent in areas with a higher seismic intensity were investigated using the mixed effects model.

Results

Compared to the same periods in 2017, mean HbA1c levels in 2018 were significantly higher 3-6 months after the earthquake (P < 0.05). The risk of HbA1c ≥ 7.0% was 1.6 (95% confidence interval 1.2-2.2) and 1.7 (1.2-2.4) times higher 3-4 and 5-6 months after the earthquake. Furthermore, the proportion of HbA1c deterioration after the earthquake was higher in areas with a higher seismic intensity (P for trend = 0.025).

Conclusion

Glycemic control was significantly deteriorated over months after the 2018 North Osaka Earthquake despite limited damage of lifelines and transportation networks. The deterioration was more prevalent in areas with a high seismic intensity.

SUBMITTER: Watanabe H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7790924 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe levels of glycemic control associated with the lowest risk of dementia in people with type 2 diabetes are unknown. This knowledge is critical to inform patient-centered glycemic target setting.ObjectiveTo examine the associations between cumulative exposure to various ranges of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) concentrations with dementia risk across sex and racial and ethnic groups and the association of current therapeutic glycemic targets with dementia risk.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included members of the Kaiser Permanente Northern California integrated health care system with type 2 diabetes who were aged 50 years or older during the study period from January 1, 1996, to September 30, 2015. Individuals with fewer than 2 HbA1c measurements during the study period, prevalent dementia at baseline, or less than 3 years of follow-up were excluded. Data were analyzed from February 2020 to January 2023.ExposuresTime-updated cumulative exposure to HbA1c thresholds. At each HbA1c measurement, participants were categorized based on the percentage of their HbA1c measurements that fell into the following categories: less than 6%, 6% to less than 7%, 7% to less than 8%, 8% to less than 9%, 9% to less than 10%, and 10% or more of total hemoglobin (to convert percentage of total hemoglobin to proportion of total hemoglobin, multiply by 0.01).Main outcomes and measuresDementia diagnosis was identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes from inpatient and outpatient encounters. Cox proportional hazards regression models estimated the association of time-varying cumulative glycemic exposure with dementia, adjusting for age, race and ethnicity, baseline health conditions, and number of HbA1c measurements.ResultsA total of 253 211 participants were included. The mean (SD) age of participants was 61.5 (9.4) years, and 53.1% were men. The mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 5.9 (4.5) years. Participants with more than 50% of HbA1c measurements at 9% to less than 10% or 10% or more had greater risk of dementia compared with those who had 50% or less of measurements in those categories (HbA1c 9% to <10%: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.31 [95% CI, 1.15-1.51]; HbA1c≥10%: aHR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.62-1.86]). By contrast, participants with more than 50% of HbA1c concentrations less than 6%, 6% to less than 7%, or 7% to less than 8% had lower risk of dementia (HbA1c<6%: aHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]; HbA1c 6% to <7%: aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.81]; HbA1c 7% to <8%: aHR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.89-0.97]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study dementia risk was greatest among adults with cumulative HbA1c concentrations of 9% or more. These results support currently recommended relaxed glycemic targets for older people with type 2 diabetes.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-monitoring of blood glucose among people with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin does not appear to be effective in improving glycemic control. We investigated whether health professional review of telemetrically transmitted self-monitored glucose results in improved glycemic control in people with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes.Methods and findingsWe performed a randomized, parallel, investigator-blind controlled trial with centralized randomization in family practices in four regions of the United Kingdom among 321 people with type 2 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >58 mmol/mol. The supported telemonitoring intervention involved self-measurement and transmission to a secure website of twice-weekly morning and evening glucose for review by family practice clinicians who were not blinded to allocation group. The control group received usual care, with at least annual review and more frequent reviews for people with poor glycemic or blood pressure control. HbA1c assessed at 9 mo was the primary outcome. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed. 160 people were randomized to the intervention group and 161 to the usual care group between June 6, 2011, and July 19, 2013. HbA1c data at follow-up were available for 146 people in the intervention group and 139 people in the control group. The mean (SD) HbA1c at follow-up was 63.0 (15.5) mmol/mol in the intervention group and 67.8 (14.7) mmol/mol in the usual care group. For primary analysis, adjusted mean HbA1c was 5.60 mmol/mol / 0.51% lower (95% CI 2.38 to 8.81 mmol/mol/ 95% CI 0.22% to 0.81%, p = 0·0007). For secondary analyses, adjusted mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure was 3.06 mmHg lower (95% CI 0.56-5.56 mmHg, p = 0.017) and mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure was 2.17 mmHg lower (95% CI 0.62-3.72, p = 0.006) among people in the intervention group when compared with usual care after adjustment for baseline differences and minimization strata. No significant differences were identified between groups in weight, treatment pattern, adherence to medication, or quality of life in secondary analyses. There were few adverse events and these were equally distributed between the intervention and control groups. In secondary analysis, there was a greater number of telephone calls between practice nurses and patients in the intervention compared with control group (rate ratio 7.50 (95% CI 4.45-12.65, p < 0.0001) but no other significant differences between groups in use of health services were identified between groups. Key limitations include potential lack of representativeness of trial participants, inability to blind participants and health professionals, and uncertainty about the mechanism, the duration of the effect, and the optimal length of the intervention.ConclusionsSupported telemonitoring resulted in clinically important improvements in control of glycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes in family practice. Current Controlled Trials, registration number ISRCTN71674628.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN 71674628.

Project description:BackgroundStringent glycemic control by using insulin as a replacement or in addition to oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) has been recommended for people with tuberculosis and diabetes mellitus (TB-DM). This systematic review (PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016039101) analyses whether this improves TB treatment outcomes.ObjectivesAmong people with drug-susceptible TB and DM on anti-TB treatment, to determine the effect of i) glycemic control (stringent or less stringent) compared to poor glycemic control and ii) insulin (only or with OHAs) compared to 'OHAs only' on unsuccessful TB treatment outcome(s). We looked for unfavourable TB treatment outcomes at the end of intensive phase and/or end of TB treatment (minimum six months and maximum 12 months follow up). Secondary outcomes were development of MDR-TB during the course of treatment, recurrence after 6 months and/or after 1 year post successful treatment completion and development of adverse events related to glucose lowering treatment (including hypoglycemic episodes).MethodsAll interventional studies (with comparison arm) and cohort studies on people with TB-DM on anti-TB treatment reporting glycemic control, DM treatment details and TB treatment outcomes were eligible. We searched electronic databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar) and grey literature between 1996 and April 2017. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done independently by two investigators and recourse to a third investigator, for resolution of differences.ResultsAfter removal of duplicates from 2326 identified articles, 2054 underwent title and abstract screening. Following full text screening of 56 articles, nine cohort studies were included. Considering high methodological and clinical heterogeneity, we decided to report the results qualitatively and not perform a meta-analysis. Eight studies dealt with glycemic control, of which only two were free of the risk of bias (with confounder-adjusted measures of effect). An Indian study reported 30% fewer unsuccessful treatment outcomes (aOR (0.95 CI): 0.72 (0.64-0.81)) and 2.8 times higher odds of 'no recurrence' (aOR (0.95 CI): 2.83 (2.60-2.92)) among patients with optimal glycemic control at baseline. A Peruvian study reported faster culture conversion among those with glycemic control (aHR (0.95 CI): 2.2 (1.1,4)). Two poor quality studies reported the effect of insulin on TB treatment outcomes.ConclusionWe identified few studies that were free of the risk of bias. There were limited data and inconsistent findings among available studies. We recommend robustly designed and analyzed studies including randomized controlled trials on the effect of glucose lowering treatment options on TB treatment outcomes.