Individualisation of glycaemic management in older people with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines recommendations

Author:

Christiaens Antoine123,Henrard Séverine23,Zerah Lorène24,Dalleur Olivia25,Bourdel-Marchasson Isabelle67,Boland Benoit38

Affiliation:

1. Fund for Scientific Research—FNRS, Brussels, Belgium

2. Clinical Pharmacy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute (LDRI), Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium

3. Institute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium

4. INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d’Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France

5. Pharmacy department, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium

6. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Bordeaux, Pôle de Gérontologie Clinique, Bordeaux, France

7. Université de Bordeaux, CNRS, UMR 5536 RMSB, Bordeaux, France

8. Geriatric medicine unit, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium

Abstract

Abstract Background Recommendations for individualised glycaemic management in older people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have recently been provided in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) issued by major scientific societies. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the content of these recommendations concerning health assessment, targets for glycaemic control, lifestyle management and glucose-lowering therapy across CPGs. Methods The CPGs on T2D management in people aged ≥65 years published in English after 2015 by major scientific societies were systematically reviewed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. The quality of the CPGs included was assessed using the AGREE-II tool. The recommendations for individualised glycaemic management were extracted, and their level of evidence (LOE) and strength of recommendation recorded. Results Three CPGs of high methodological quality were included, namely those from the American Diabetes Association 2020, the Endocrine Society 2019 and the Diabetes Canada Expert Committee 2018. They made 27 recommendations addressing individualised glycaemic management, a minority of which (40%) had a high LOE. Comparison of the 27 recommendations identified some discrepancies between CPGs, e.g. the individualised values of HbA1c targets. The 13 strong recommendations addressed 10 clinical messages, five of which are recommended in all three CPGs, i.e. assess health status, screen for cognitive impairment, avoid hypoglycaemia, prioritise drugs with low hypoglycaemic effects and simplify complex drug regimens. Conclusions Although there is a consensus on avoiding hypoglycaemia in older patients with T2D, significant discrepancies regarding individualised HbA1c targets exist between CPGs.

Funder

Fund for Scientific Research

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Geriatrics and Gerontology,Aging,General Medicine

Cited by 24 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3