0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Coordinated Care to Optimize Cardiovascular Preventive Therapies in Type 2 Diabetes : A Randomized Clinical Trial

      1 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 3 , 10 , 1 , 1 , 11 , 11 , 12 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , 13 , COORDINATE–Diabetes Site Investigators
      JAMA
      American Medical Association (AMA)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Evidence-based therapies to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults with type 2 diabetes are underused in clinical practice.

          Objective

          To assess the effect of a coordinated, multifaceted intervention of assessment, education, and feedback vs usual care on the proportion of adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prescribed all 3 groups of recommended, evidence-based therapies (high-intensity statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs] or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT2] inhibitors and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs]).

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          Cluster randomized clinical trial with 43 US cardiology clinics recruiting participants from July 2019 through May 2022 and follow-up through December 2022. The participants were adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease not already taking all 3 groups of evidence-based therapies.

          Interventions

          Assessing local barriers, developing care pathways, coordinating care, educating clinicians, reporting data back to the clinics, and providing tools for participants (n = 459) vs usual care per practice guidelines (n = 590).

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of recommended therapies at 6 to 12 months after enrollment. The secondary outcomes included changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors and a composite outcome of all-cause death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, stroke, decompensated heart failure, or urgent revascularization (the trial was not powered to show these differences).

          Results

          Of 1049 participants enrolled (459 at 20 intervention clinics and 590 at 23 usual care clinics), the median age was 70 years and there were 338 women (32.2%), 173 Black participants (16.5%), and 90 Hispanic participants (8.6%). At the last follow-up visit (12 months for 97.3% of participants), those in the intervention group were more likely to be prescribed all 3 therapies (173/457 [37.9%]) vs the usual care group (85/588 [14.5%]), which is a difference of 23.4% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.38 [95% CI, 2.49 to 7.71]; P < .001) and were more likely to be prescribed each of the 3 therapies (change from baseline in high-intensity statins from 66.5% to 70.7% for intervention vs from 58.2% to 56.8% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.06-2.83]; ACEIs or ARBs: from 75.1% to 81.4% for intervention vs from 69.6% to 68.4% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.14-2.91]; SGLT2 inhibitors and/or GLP-1RAs: from 12.3% to 60.4% for intervention vs from 14.5% to 35.5% for usual care [adjusted OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.08-4.64]). The intervention was not associated with changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors. The composite secondary outcome occurred in 23 of 457 participants (5%) in the intervention group vs 40 of 588 participants (6.8%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.46 to 1.33]).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          A coordinated, multifaceted intervention increased prescription of 3 groups of evidence-based therapies in adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03936660

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2019 ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies

              Summary Background Uncertainties persist about the magnitude of associations of diabetes mellitus and fasting glucose concentration with risk of coronary heart disease and major stroke subtypes. We aimed to quantify these associations for a wide range of circumstances. Methods We undertook a meta-analysis of individual records of diabetes, fasting blood glucose concentration, and other risk factors in people without initial vascular disease from studies in the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. We combined within-study regressions that were adjusted for age, sex, smoking, systolic blood pressure, and body-mass index to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for vascular disease. Findings Analyses included data for 698 782 people (52 765 non-fatal or fatal vascular outcomes; 8·49 million person-years at risk) from 102 prospective studies. Adjusted HRs with diabetes were: 2·00 (95% CI 1·83–2·19) for coronary heart disease; 2·27 (1·95–2·65) for ischaemic stroke; 1·56 (1·19–2·05) for haemorrhagic stroke; 1·84 (1·59–2·13) for unclassified stroke; and 1·73 (1·51–1·98) for the aggregate of other vascular deaths. HRs did not change appreciably after further adjustment for lipid, inflammatory, or renal markers. HRs for coronary heart disease were higher in women than in men, at 40–59 years than at 70 years and older, and with fatal than with non-fatal disease. At an adult population-wide prevalence of 10%, diabetes was estimated to account for 11% (10–12%) of vascular deaths. Fasting blood glucose concentration was non-linearly related to vascular risk, with no significant associations between 3·90 mmol/L and 5·59 mmol/L. Compared with fasting blood glucose concentrations of 3·90–5·59 mmol/L, HRs for coronary heart disease were: 1·07 (0·97–1·18) for lower than 3·90 mmol/L; 1·11 (1·04–1·18) for 5·60–6·09 mmol/L; and 1·17 (1·08–1·26) for 6·10–6·99 mmol/L. In people without a history of diabetes, information about fasting blood glucose concentration or impaired fasting glucose status did not significantly improve metrics of vascular disease prediction when added to information about several conventional risk factors. Interpretation Diabetes confers about a two-fold excess risk for a wide range of vascular diseases, independently from other conventional risk factors. In people without diabetes, fasting blood glucose concentration is modestly and non-linearly associated with risk of vascular disease. Funding British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and Pfizer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA
                JAMA
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                0098-7484
                March 06 2023
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina
                [2 ]Victorian Heart Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
                [3 ]University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
                [4 ]Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas
                [5 ]University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor
                [6 ]University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
                [7 ]Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
                [8 ]Saint Luke’s Health System, Kansas City, Missouri
                [9 ]Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
                [10 ]School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
                [11 ]Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Ridgefield, Connecticut
                [12 ]Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana
                [13 ]for the COORDINATE–Diabetes Site Investigators
                Article
                10.1001/jama.2023.2854
                36877177
                b884905e-924a-4423-a694-19ba469a5ee6
                © 2023
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article