American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement Research Articles

Perioperative management of the patient with diabetes requiring emergency surgery

Perioperative management of the patient with diabetes requiring emergency surgery

In-hospital Management of Diabetes

In-hospital Management of Diabetes

In-Hospital Management of Diabetes.

In-Hospital Management of Diabetes.

Validation of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnosis in computerized medical records in primary health care.

BackgroundComputerized Clinical Records, which are incorporated in primary health care practice, have great potential for research. In order to use this information, data quality and reliability must be assessed to prevent compromising the validity of the results.The aim of this study is to validate the diagnosis of hypertension and diabetes mellitus in the computerized clinical records of primary health care, taking the diagnosis criteria established in the most prominently used clinical guidelines as the gold standard against which what measure the sensitivity, specificity, and determine the predictive values.The gold standard for diabetes mellitus was the diagnostic criteria established in 2003 American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement for diabetic subjects. The gold standard for hypertension was the diagnostic criteria established in the Joint National Committee published in 2003.MethodsA cross-sectional multicentre validation study of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnoses in computerized clinical records of primary health care was carried out. Diagnostic criteria from the most prominently clinical practice guidelines were considered for standard reference.Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and global agreement (with kappa index), were calculated. Results were shown overall and stratified by sex and age groups.ResultsThe agreement for diabetes mellitus with the reference standard as determined by the guideline was almost perfect (κ = 0.990), with a sensitivity of 99.53%, a specificity of 99.49%, a positive predictive value of 91.23% and a negative predictive value of 99.98%.Hypertension diagnosis showed substantial agreement with the reference standard as determined by the guideline (κ = 0.778), the sensitivity was 85.22%, the specificity 96.95%, the positive predictive value 85.24%, and the negative predictive value was 96.95%. Sensitivity results were worse in patients who also had diabetes and in those aged 70 years or over.ConclusionsOur results substantiate the validity of using diagnoses of diabetes and hypertension found within the computerized clinical records for epidemiologic studies.

Reexamining the evidence for inpatient glucose control: New recommendations for glycemic targets

To review the risks of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients, data supporting the benefits of treating hyperglycemia, and recommendations from the 2009 American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association consensus statement on the management of inpatient hyperglycemia. Inpatient hyperglycemia is common, costly, and associated with poor clinical outcomes in many disease states. Despite inconsistencies in clinical trial results, good glucose management in the hospital remains important. Target blood glucose concentrations (BGs) were recently modified to somewhat higher values with the expectation that the benefit of treatment will persist with a lower risk of hypoglycemia, which is itself another marker of poor outcome in critically and non-critically ill patients. In the intensive care unit (ICU), the threshold to start treatment is a BG of <or=180 mg/dL. I.V. insulin is the treatment of choice in critically ill patients because of its rapid onset and offset of action. Once i.v. insulin is started, the BG should be maintained between 140 and 180 mg/ dL; a lower BG target (110-140 mg/dL) may be appropriate in selected patients. Targets of <110 mg/dL or >180 mg/dL are no longer recommended. In non-critically ill patients, premeal BG targets are <140 mg/dL; random BGs of <180 mg/dL are recommended. Scheduled subcutaneous insulin is the treatment of choice for hyperglycemia in non-critically ill patients; use of sliding-scale insulin is strongly discouraged. To avoid hypoglycemia, insulin regimens should be reassessed if BG falls to <100 mg/dL. Poor glycemic control in the hospital setting is a quality-of-care, safety, and cost issue. Safe and effective strategies to implement optimal glycemic control require multidisciplinary involvement. Insulin given i.v. in the ICU or subcutaneously on an as-scheduled regimen in other parts of the hospital is the treatment of choice.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Glycemic Control

People with diabetes are more likely to be hospitalized and to have longer durations of hospital stay than those without diabetes. A recent survey estimated that 22% of all hospital inpatient days were incurred by people with diabetes and that hospital inpatient care accounted for half of the 174 billion USD total U.S. medical expenditures for this disease (1). These findings are due, in part, to the continued expansion of the worldwide epidemic of type 2 diabetes. In the U.S. alone, there are ∼1.6 million new cases of diabetes each year, with an over all prevalence of 23.6 million people (7.8% of the population, with one-fourth of the cases remaining undiagnosed). An additional 57 million American adults are at high risk for type 2 diabetes (2). Although the costs of illness-related stress hyperglycemia are not known, they are likely to be considerable in light of the poor prognosis of such patients (3–6). There is substantial observational evidence linking hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients (with or without diabetes) to poor outcomes. Cohort studies as well as a few early randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested that intensive treatment of hyperglycemia improved hospital outcomes (5–8). In 2004, this evidence led the American College of Endocrinology (ACE) and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), in collaboration with the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and other medical organizations, to develop recommendations for treatment of inpatient hyperglycemia (9). In 2005, the ADA added recommendations for treatment of hyperglycemia in the hospitalto itsannual Standards of Medical Care (10). Recommendations from the ACE and the ADA generally endorsed tight glycemic control in critical care units. For patients in general medical and surgical units, where RCT evidence regarding treatment targets was lacking, glycemic goals similar to those advised for outpatients were advocated (9, …

Reflecting on Type 2 Diabetes Prevention: More Questions than Answers!

Given the enormous public health and economic burden posed by the global epidemic of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), intervention in the prediabetes stage of disease to prevent progression to T2DM and its vascular complications seems the most sensible approach. Precisely how best to intervene remains the subject of much debate. Prudent lifestyle changes have been shown to significantly reduce the risk of progression in individuals with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). Although lifestyle modifications are notoriously difficult to maintain, there is evidence that intensive intervention results in continued preventive benefit after the stopping of structured counselling. A number of drug therapies, including metformin, acarbose, orlistat and rosiglitazone, have also been proven effective in preventing progression from IFG/IGT, but unresolved issues still remain. Specifically, whether large numbers of individuals with glucose dysregulation who may never progress to T2DM should be exposed to the risk of pharmacological adverse effects is a topic of discussion and debate. Furthermore, there are limited data on the effectiveness of implementing interventions during the prediabetic state to prevent cardiovascular complications that may be hyperglycaemia related. A recent American Diabetes Association (ADA) consensus statement on IFG/IGT recommends lifestyle modification for individuals with IFG or IGT. Of note, the ADA consensus statement introduces the option of adding metformin treatment to lifestyle changes in those individuals who have combined IFG/IGT plus an additional risk factor for progression and who also have some features that increase the likelihood of benefiting from metformin treatment. The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors are a new class of oral antidiabetic agents that, in addition to being effective in improving glycaemic control, may exert beneficial effects in preserving beta-cell function. These characteristics, combined with a low risk of hypoglycaemia, weight neutrality and what appears - so far - to be a relatively benign tolerability profile, make these agents intriguing candidates for preventive treatment.

Diabetes Mellitus Screening in Pediatric Primary Care

The goal was to determine the rates of diabetes screening and the prevalence of screening abnormalities in overweight and nonoverweight individuals in an urban primary care clinic. This study was a retrospective chart review conducted in a hospital-based urban primary care setting. Deidentified data for patients who were 10 to 19 years of age and had > or = 1 BMI measurement between September 1, 2002, and September 1, 2004, were extracted from the hospital electronic health record. A total of 7710 patients met the study criteria. Patients were 73.0% black or Hispanic and 47.0% female; 42.0% of children exceeded normal weight, with 18.2% at risk for overweight and 23.8% overweight. On the basis of BMI, family history, and race, 8.7% of patients met American Diabetes Association criteria for type 2 diabetes mellitus screening, and 2452 screening tests were performed for 1642 patients. Female gender, older age group, and family history of diabetes were associated with screening. Increasing BMI percentile was associated with screening, exhibiting a dose-response relationship. Screening rates were significantly higher (45.4% vs 19.0%) for patients who met the American Diabetes Association criteria; however, less than one half of adolescents who should have been screened were screened. Abnormal glucose metabolism was seen for 9.2% of patients screened. This study shows that, although pediatricians are screening for diabetes mellitus, screening is not being conducted according to the American Diabetes Association consensus statement. Point-of-care delivery of consensus recommendations could increase provider awareness of current recommendations, possibly improving rates of systematic screening and subsequent identification of children with laboratory evidence of abnormal glucose metabolism.

American College of Endocrinology and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Diabetes and Glycemic Control

American College of Endocrinology and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Diabetes and Glycemic Control

American College of Endocrinology and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Diabetes and Glycemic Control

American College of Endocrinology and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Diabetes and Glycemic Control

Clinical and statistical evaluation of self-monitoring blood glucose meters.

Our objective was to compare statistical and clinical methods for the evaluation of five self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) meters. Two successive capillary blood glucose measurements were performed, and a simultaneous laboratory venous glucose measurement was used as the reference value. Accuracy was studied by comparing each of the two successive meter values with the reference value by 1) a Spearman's correlation test, 2) a Wilcoxon's paired test, 3) the percentage of values within the 10% interval of the reference value according to the American Diabetes Association consensus statement, and 4) the error grid analysis. The first two methods did not discriminate between the SMBG systems: r was >0.92 for the five meters, and a significant difference between the meter and reference values was found for all but one meter. The two other methods allowed classification of the devices into three groups according to their accuracy: good (two meters), acceptable (two meters), and unacceptable (one meter). These two methods gave consistent results and both had a good reproducibility, because the classification was similar for the two successive measurements. Both the Spearman's and Wilcoxon's paired tests, although commonly used, are inappropriate to evaluate SMBG systems. The percentage of SMBG values within the +/-10% interval and the error grid analysis are more accurate, because they consistently classified the five glucose meters tested in our study with a high degree of reproducibility.