A Comparison of the Use and Quality of Antidiabetic Medication Regimens Between Non-Hispanic Black and White Adults With Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes in the US

Author:

Perez Alexandra12,Elrod Shara12,Sanchez Jesus12

Affiliation:

1. Nova Southeastern University College of Pharmacy, Davie, Florida (Dr Perez, Dr Sanchez)

2. University of North Texas System College of Pharmacy, Fort Worth, Texas (Dr Elrod)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the use of clinical guideline–recommended antidiabetic therapies among whites and blacks with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Methods A secondary data analysis based on NHANES 2003-2012 cohort data including non-Hispanic black and white adults with uncontrolled (A1C ≥6.5%) type 2 diabetes. Results Blacks were more likely to have the highest levels of A1C compared to whites (A1C >9% = 29.8% vs 16.2%). There was no statistical difference in the use of recommended regimens across racial group (blacks 60.5% vs whites 66.0%). Blacks and whites who were most uncontrolled were least likely to be on recommended regimens (A1C 6.5%-7.4%: 78.5%, A1C 7.5%-9%: 57.2%; and A1C >9%: 54.1%). This pattern was most pronounced among blacks compared to whites but was not statistically different. Use of recommended therapies decreased 29.0 percentage points for blacks and 20.1 percentage points among whites from an A1C level of 6.5% to 7.4% to >9%, respectively. The total proportion of blacks and whites on intensified non-insulin triple or insulin-based therapies were 38.9% and 41.8%, respectively. Conclusions Even though blacks were more likely than whites to have the highest A1C, no significant differences were found in the use of clinical–guideline recommended regimens or other regimen use outcomes. Along with lifestyle modification, further intensification of antidiabetic regimens may help improve glycemic control and other disparities between blacks and whites.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Professions (miscellaneous),Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism

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