Achieving and maintaining adequate glycaemic control is critical to reduce diabetes-related complications. Therapeutic inertia is one of the leading causes of suboptimal glycaemic control.

To assess the degree of inertia in insulin initiation and intensification in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2).

We performed a retrospective longitudinal cohort study and followed DM-2 2 years before and 2 years after the start of insulin. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved glycaemic targets (HBA1c ≤ 7.5%) at 6th month, 1st year and 2nd year.

We included 374 predominantly male subjects (62%). The mean age was 55.3 ± 11.3 years, the mean duration of DM-2 was 12.0 ± 7.3 years, 64.4% were obese, 47.6% had a microvascular disease, and 24.3% had a macrovascular disease. The mean HBA1c at -2nd year and -1st year was 9.2 ± 2.1% and 9.3 ± 2.0%, respectively. The mean HbA1C at the time of insulin initiation was 10.4 ± 2.1%. The mean HBA1c at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 8.5 ± 1.8%, 8.4 ± 1.8% and 8.5 ± 1.7%, respectively. The proportion of subjects who achieved HBA1c targets at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 32.9%, 31.0% and 32.9%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that achieving HBA1c targets at 6th month and 1st year increases the odds of achieving HBA1c targets at 2nd year (OR 4.87 [2.4-9.6] p < 0.001) and (OR 6.2 [3.2-12.0], p < 0.001), respectively.

In people with DM-2, there was an alarming delay in starting and titrating insulin. The reduction in HBA1c plateaued at 6th month. Earlier initiation and intensification of insulin therapy are critical to achieving glycaemic targets. More studies are needed to examine the causes of therapeutic inertia from physicians', patients' and systems' points of view.

Insulin therapy plays a crucial role in the management of type 2 diabetes as the disease progresses. Over the past century, insulin formulations have undergone significant modifications and bioengineering, resulting in a diverse range of available insulin products. These products show distinct pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Consequently, various insulin regimens have em-erged for the management of type 2 diabetes, including premixed formulations and combinations of basal and bolus insulins. The utilization of different insulin regimens yields disparate clinical outcomes, adverse events, and, notably, patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs provide valuable insights from the patient's perspective, serving as a valuable mine of information for enhancing healthcare and informing clinical decisions. Adherence to insulin therapy, a critical patient-reported outcome, significantly affects clinical outcomes and is influenced by multiple factors. This review provides insights into the clinical effectiveness of various insulin preparations, PROs, and factors impacting insulin therapy adherence, with the aim of enhancing healthcare practices and informing clinical decisions for individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a significant post-arthroplasty complication for diabetic patients, with uncontrolled diabetes identified as a PJI risk factor. Taiwan's Diabetes Shared Care Program (DSCP) was established for holistic diabetes care.

To evaluate the DSCP's impact on PJI incidence and patients' medical costs.

Data were analysed from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database from 2010 to 2020, focusing on type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) patients who had undergone arthroplasty. The study group involved DSCP participants, while a comparison group comprised non-participants with matched propensity scores for age, sex, and comorbidities. The primary outcome was the PJI incidence difference between the groups; the secondary outcome was the medical expense difference.

The study group consisted of 11,908 type 2 DM patients who had arthroplasty and joined the DSCP; PJI occurred in 128 patients. Among non-participants, 184 patients had PJI. The PJI incidence difference between the groups was statistically significant (1.07% vs 1.55%). The study group's medical costs were notably lower, regardless of PJI incidence. Multivariate regression showed higher PJI risk in patients in comparison group, aged >70 years, male, or who had obesity, anaemia.

The study indicates that DSCP involvement reduces PJI risks and decreases annual medical costs for diabetic patients after arthroplasty. Consequently, the DSCP is a recommendable option for such patients who are preparing for total joint arthroplasty.

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a higher risk of incident and aggravating frailty over time. Frailty-initiating risk factors have been identified, but modulators of frail severity over time remain poorly defined. We aimed to explore the influences of glucose-lowering drug (GLD) strategy on DM patients' risk of increasing frail severity. We retrospectively identified type 2 DM patients between 2008 and 2016, dividing them into "no GLD", oral GLD (oGLD) monotherapy, oGLD combination, and those receiving insulin without or with oGLD at baseline. Increasing frail severity, defined as ≥1 FRAIL component increase, was the outcome of interest. Cox proportional hazard regression was utilized to analyze the risk of increasing frail severity associated with GLD strategy, accounting for demographic, physical data, comorbidities, medication, and laboratory panel. After screening 82,208 patients with DM, 49,519 (no GLD, 42.7%; monotherapy, 24.0%; combination, 28.5%; and insulin user, 4.8%) were enrolled for analysis. After 4 years, 12,295 (24.8%) had increasing frail severity. After multivariate adjustment, oGLD combination group exhibited a significantly lower risk of increasing frail severity (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 - 0.94), while the risk of insulin users increased (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.21) than no GLD group. Users receiving more oGLD exhibited a trend of less risk reduction relative to others. In conclusion, we discovered that the strategy of oral glucose lowering drugs combination might reduce the risk of frail severity increase. Accordingly, medication reconciliation in frail diabetic older adults should take into account their GLD regimens.

Therapeutic inertia leading to delays in insulin initiation or intensification is a major contributor to lack of optimal diabetes care. This report reviews the literature summarizing data on therapeutic inertia and delays in insulin intensification in the management of type 2 diabetes.

A literature search was conducted of the Allied & Complementary Medicine, BIOSIS Previews, Embase, EMCare, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, and ToxFile databases for clinical studies, observational research, and meta-analyses from 2012 to 2022 using search terms for type 2 diabetes and delay in initiating/intensifying insulin. Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria.

Time until insulin initiation among patients on two to three antihyperglycemic agents was at least 5 years, and mean A1C ranged from 8.7 to 9.8%. Early insulin intensification was linked with reduced A1C by 1.4%, reduction of severe hypoglycemic events from 4 to <1 per 100 person-years, and diminution in risk of heart failure (HF) by 18%, myocardial infarction (MI) by 23%, and stroke by 28%. In contrast, delayed insulin intensification was associated with increased risk of HF (64%), MI (67%), and stroke (51%) and a higher incidence of diabetic retinopathy. In the views of both patients and providers, hypoglycemia was identified as a primary driver of therapeutic inertia; 75.5% of physicians reported that they would treat more aggressively if not for concerns about hypoglycemia.

Long delays before insulin initiation and intensification in clinically eligible patients are largely driven by concerns over hypoglycemia. New diabetes technology that provides continuous glucose monitoring may reduce occurrences of hypoglycemia and help overcome therapeutic inertia associated with insulin initiation and intensification.

The global health burden of diabetes is on the rise and has affected more than half a billion people worldwide, particularly in Southeast Asia, North Africa, Africa, and the Western Pacific, Middle East, and South and Central America regions of the International Diabetes Federation (IDF). Despite many new treatments being available for the management of diabetes, glycemic control remains suboptimal in Asia, compared to the rest of the world. Delay in timely insulin initiation and inadequate titration of insulin are regarded to be some of the important reasons for inadequate glycemic control. Additionally, Asian populations have a distinct phenotype, including a younger age of onset and higher glycemic excursions, suggestive of a lower beta-cell function, as compared to non-Asians. Although there are multiple local and international guidelines on insulin initiation and titration, some of these guidelines can be complex. There is an unmet need for guideline recommendations on basal insulin initiation and titration to be simplified and customized for the Asian population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A unified approach would increase adoption of basal insulin initiation by primary care and family medicine physicians, which in turn would help reduce the inertia to insulin initiation. With this background, a consensus-seeking meeting was conducted with 14 experts from seven Asian countries to delineate appropriate practices for insulin initiation and titration in the Asian context. The key objective was to propose a simple insulin titration algorithm, specific for the Asian population, to improve glycemic control and optimize therapeutic outcomes of people with T2DM on basal insulin. Following a detailed review of literature and current guidelines, and potential barriers to insulin initiation and titration, the experts proposed a simplified insulin titration algorithm based on both physician- and patient-led components. The consensus recommendations of the experts related to basal insulin initiation and titration have been summarized in this article, along with the proposed titration algorithm for optimizing glycemic control in the Asian population with T2DM.

IDegAsp, a co-formulation of long-acting basal (insulin degludec) and rapid-acting bolus (insulin aspart) insulin, provides separate prandial and basal glucose-lowering effects with relatively low risk of hypoglycaemia. Its efficacy and safety have been investigated in a large clinical trial programme (BOOST). We present the rationale and design of the ARISE study, which aims to assess glycaemic control and other clinical parameters associated with IDegAsp use in real world.

ARISE is a ~26-wk-long, prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating IDegAsp treatment. Approximately 1112 patients with T2D aged ≥18 years previously on anti-hyperglycaemic drugs except IDegAsp will be enroled across six countries from 15 Aug 2019 to 12 Nov 2020. IDegAsp treatment will be initiated at the physicians' discretion and as per the local label. Key exclusion criteria include previous participation, or previous IDegAsp treatment. The primary and secondary endpoints are change in HbA_1c from baseline (wk 0) to study end (wk 26-36) and the proportion of patients achieving the target HbA_1c level of <7% at the study end, respectively. A mixed model for repeated measurements will analyse the primary endpoint.

Between-country differences in the prescription patterns of glucose-lowering agents in people with T2D warrant examination of their clinical use in different geographical settings. The ARISE study is designed to assess the clinical use of IDegAsp from real world in six different countries. Findings from the ARISE study will supplement those of previous randomised controlled studies by establishing real-world evidence of IDegAsp use in the participating countries.

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04042441. Registered 02 August 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04042441.

Aim of this study is to describe changes in the utilization of basal insulins (glargine, detemir, degludec, neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH]) among individuals with type 2 diabetes between 2003 and 2018 in the United Kingdom (UK).

Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum, we created three study cohorts of individuals with type 2 diabetes: (1) all users of antidiabetic drugs (n = 686,170); (2) initiators of antidiabetic drugs (n = 382,247); and (3) initiators of basal insulins (n = 85,369). Trends in prescription rates were determined using Poisson regression overall and stratified by sex, cardiovascular disease history, and obesity. Crude and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CI) comparing rates of treatment change between classes of basal insulins, with an intention-to-treat exposure definition.

During the study period, prescription rates of insulin analogues increased in the all-user cohort from 118.3 (95% CI: 116.4, 120.2) prescriptions per 1000 person-years in 2003 to 579.4 (95% CI: 576.9, 582.0) in 2018. Prescription rates of NPH decreased from 770.5 (95% CI: 765.0, 775.3) in 2003 to 457.7 (95% CI: 455.5, 460.0) in 2018. Compared to initiators of NPH, initiators of detemir were more likely to change treatment (adjusted HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.25, 1.37) while glargine initiators were less likely to change treatment (adjusted HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82, 0.88).

Basal insulin prescription evolved between 2003 and 2018. Our study provides insight into the evolving use of basal insulin among individuals with type 2 diabetes in the UK.

Despite novel therapeutic options, many people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not achieve their HbA1c targets. Given the progressive nature of T2D, many individuals not controlled with oral therapy will require advancement to injectable therapy using either a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), recently recommended as a first option, or traditionally a basal insulin. However, premix insulins remain frequently used, either as initial injectable therapy or as intensification from basal insulin. Premix insulin injections can potentially provide significant glycaemic improvements to basal insulin but at the expense of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain and the need for multiple daily doses, which may affect treatment adherence. Real-world evidence suggests that glycaemic control often remains suboptimal with premix insulins. Fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs provide a novel alternative to premix insulin for therapy intensification. While no direct comparisons between premix insulins and FRCs are available, results from meta-analyses suggest that FRCs may offer better HbA1c reductions, a lower risk of hypoglycaemia and less weight gain compared with premix insulin in a simplified treatment regimen. A head-to-head trial of T2D treatment intensification with premix insulin and a FRC of basal insulin plus a GLP-1 RA is currently in progress, which should help to clarify the outcomes for each treatment option. This review discusses the unmet needs of people with T2D treated with premix insulin and provides evidence supporting FRCs of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs as an alternative treatment option.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess patients' perspectives on their health status, providing opportunities to improve the quality of care. While PROMs are increasingly used in high-income settings, limited data are available on PROMs use for diabetes and hypertension in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This scoping review aimed to determine how PROMs are employed for diabetes and hypertension care in LMICs.

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language studies published between August 2009 and August 2019 that measured at least one PROM related to diabetes or hypertension in LMICs. Full texts of included studies were examined to assess study characteristics, target population, outcome focus, PROMs used, and methods for data collection and reporting.

Sixty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and reported on PROMs for people diagnosed with hypertension and/or diabetes and receiving care in health facilities. Thirty-nine (57%) reported on upper-middle-income countries, 19 (28%) reported on lower-middle-income countries, 4 (6%) reported on low-income countries, and 6 (9%) were multi-country. Most focused on diabetes (60/68, 88%), while 4 studies focused on hypertension and 4 focused on diabetes/hypertension comorbidity. Outcomes of interest varied; most common were glycemic or blood pressure control (38), health literacy and treatment adherence (27), and acute complications (22). Collectively the studies deployed 55 unique tools to measure patient outcomes. Most common were the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (7) and EuroQoL-5D-3L (7).

PROMs are deployed in LMICs around the world, with greatest reported use in LMICs with an upper-middle-income classification. Diabetes PROMs were more widely deployed in LMICs than hypertension PROMs, suggesting an opportunity to adapt PROMs for hypertension. Future research focusing on standardization and simplification could improve future comparability and adaptability across LMIC contexts. Incorporation into national health information systems would best establish PROMs as a means to reveal the effectiveness of person-centered diabetes and hypertension care.

To describe the extent of delays in insulin initiation, analyze its impact on glycemic control, and explore factors influencing delayed insulin initiation among Chinese type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients.

A real-world, retrospective cohort study with regional electronic health records from Fuzhou, southeast China was conducted among T2DM patients. Adult patients uncontrolled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs; HbA_1c ≥7%) and initiated on insulin treatment were included. Time to insulin initiation was described. After propensity-score matching, Wilcoxon rank-sum test and chi-square test were used to compare follow-up HbA_1c (first HbA_1c 3 months after insulin initiation) between timely (initiated insulin within 6 months after OAD failure) and delayed (initiated after 6 months) insulin-initiation groups. Sensitivity analysis was also performed by linear and logistic regression. Factors associated with delayed insulin initiation were explored using logistic regression.

A total of 940 patients were included, with mean±SD age 66.3±11.9 years. In sum, 328 had HbA_1c recorded 3 months after insulin initiation. After propensity-score matching (1:1 matching), 184 patients were included for further analysis. Median follow-up HbA_1c was lower in the timely-initiation group than the delayed-initiation group (7.25% vs 8.25%, P=0.009). Patients in the timely initiation group also had higher odds of achieving HbA_1c <7% (OR=3.15, P=0.001). Results were confirmed by logistic regression. Hypertension, coronary artery disease, baseline HbA_1c, and hospital level at insulin initiation were associated with delays in insulin initiation.

Timely insulin initiation after OAD failure is associated with better glycemic control.

To describe the characteristics and fasting experience of a subgroup of patients in the VISION study who initiated insulin therapy and chose to fast during Ramadan, and to discuss the VISION Ramadan substudy data in the context of previous Ramadan studies.

The VISION study was a prospective, non-interventional, observational study of adult patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus in 6 countries in the Western Pacific, Middle East and North Africa, receiving insulin injection therapy for the first time. In this VISION Ramadan substudy, fasting data was collected during Ramadan 2014 and 2015.

Of 1617 patients in the VISION study, data was collected for 357 patients who chose to fast during Ramadan. At baseline, mean HbA1c was 10.1%, duration of diabetes was 8.8 years, and mean BMI was 30 kg/m². All patients with non-missing data (n = 169) received advice on fasting during Ramadan. The majority of patients fasted for the full month of Ramadan, and around one-third of patients fasted outside Ramadan.

Here we provide an update on the characteristics and Ramadan experience of patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus who initiated insulin therapy and chose to fast during Ramadan. There is still a need to explore patient's experience during fasting, and identify and address methods to better help manage those patients.