BACKGROUND: Lifestyle modifications are a key part of type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment. Many patients find long-term self-management difficult, and mobile apps could be a solution. In 2010, in the United States, a mobile app was approved as an official medical device. Similar apps have entered the Japanese market but are yet to be classified as medical devices.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of Save Medical Corporation (SMC)-01, a mobile app for the support of lifestyle modifications among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS: This was a 24-week multi-institutional, prospective randomized controlled trial. The intervention group received SMC-01, an app with functions allowing patients to record data and receive personalized feedback to encourage a healthier lifestyle. The control group used paper journals for diabetes self-management. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in change in hemoglobin A1c from baseline to week 12.
RESULTS: The change in hemoglobin A1c from baseline to week 12 was -0.05% (95% CI -0.14% to 0.04%) in the intervention group and 0.06% (95% CI -0.04% to 0.15%) in the control group. The between-group difference in change was -0.11% (95% CI -0.24% to 0.03%; P=.11).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant change in glycemic control. The lack of change could be due to SMC-01 insufficiently inducing behavior change, absence of screening for patients who have high intention to change their lifestyle, low effective usage of SMC-01 due to design issues, or problems with the SMC-01 intervention. Future efforts should focus on these issues in the early phase of developing interventions.
BACKGROUND: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCT2032200033; https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCT2032200033.

This review seeks to address major gaps and delays between our rapidly evolving body of knowledge on type 2 diabetes and its translation into real-world practice. Through updated and improved best practices informed by recent evidence and described herein, we stand to better attain A1c targets, help preserve beta cell integrity and moderate glycemic variability, minimize treatment-emergent hypoglycemia, circumvent prescribing to \"treatment failure,\" and prevent long-term complications. The first topic addressed in this review concerns updates in the 2023 and 2024 diabetes treatment guidelines for which further elaboration can help facilitate integration into routine care. The second concerns advances in diabetes research that have not yet found their way into guidelines, though they are endorsed by strong evidence and are ready for real-world use in appropriate patients. The final theme addresses lingering misconceptions about the underpinnings of type 2 diabetes-fundamental fallacies that continue to be asserted in the textbooks and continuing medical education upon which physicians build their approaches. A corrected and up-to-date understanding of the disease state is essential for practitioners to both conceptually and translationally manage initial onset through late-stage type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Adults with early-onset diabetes (age < 40 years) have an increased risk of complications, and it is unclear whether they are receiving guideline recommended care. We compared the frequency and results of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing in adults with early-onset and usual-onset diabetes and assessed factors related to guideline concordance.
METHODS: Population-level databases from Alberta, Canada (∼4.5 million) were used to identify adults with incident diabetes. The cohort was stratified by age at diagnosis (< 40 vs. ≥ 40 years) and then followed for 365 days for HbA1c testing. Adjusted multivariable analyses were used to identify clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with guideline concordance.
RESULTS: Among 23,643 adults with incident diabetes (mean age 54.1 ± 15.4 years; 42.1 % female), 18.9 % had early-onset diabetes. Early-onset diabetes was associated with lower frequency of testing (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.80; 95 % CI 0.70-0.90) and above target glycaemic levels compared to usual-onset diabetes (aOR, 1.45; 95 % CI 1.29-1.64). Factors associated with guideline concordant frequency of HbA1c testing were rural residence and insulin use.
CONCLUSIONS: In our universal care setting with premium-free health care, early-onset diabetes was associated with lower rates of HbA1c testing and sub-optimal glycaemic control compared to those with usual-onset diabetes.

UNASSIGNED: There has been a trend toward hospital systems and insurers acquiring privately owned physician practices and subsequently converting them into vertically integrated practices. The purpose of this study is to observe whether this change in ownership of a medical practice influences adherence to clinical guidelines for the management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
UNASSIGNED: This is an observational study using pooled cross-sectional data (2014-2016 and 2018-2019) from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a nationally representative probability sample of US office-based physician visits. A total of 7499 chronic routine follow ups and preventative care visits to non-integrated (solo and group physician practices) and integrated practices were analyzed to see whether guideline concordant care was provided. Measures included 7 services that are recommended annually for individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (HbA1c, lipid panel, serum creatinine, depression screening, influenza immunization, foot examination, and BMI).
UNASSIGNED: Compared to non-integrated physician practices, vertically integrated practices had higher rates of hemoglobin A1C testing (odds ratio 1.58 [95% CI 1.07-2.33], P < .05), serum creatine testing (odds ratio 1.53 [95% CI 1.02-2.29], P < .05), foot examinations (odds ratio 2.03 [95% CI 0.98-4.22], P = .058), and BMI measuring (odds ratio 1.54 [95% CI 0.99-2.39], P = .054). There was no significant difference in lipid panel testing, depression screenings, or influenza immunizations.
UNASSIGNED: Our results show that integrated medical practices have a higher adherence to diabetes practice guidelines than non-integrated practices. However, rates of services provided regardless of ownership were low.

BACKGROUND: The potential benefits from digitalisation processes will only be fully realised if the conceptual challenges they uncover are accepted and addressed, alongside the technical ones such as interoperability. Will \'computable\' clinical guidelines be compatible with personalised care if the definition of the relevant disease embeds preferences that pre-empt those of the individual patient?
METHODS: As a case study we investigated the definition of diabetes in glycaemic management guidelines.
RESULTS: The dominant component of its definition - HbA1c ≥6.5% - embeds the consensus preference judgement of a 2009 International Expert Committee.
CONCLUSIONS: This preference-sensitive threshold for the diagnosis of diabetes has subsequently been endorsed in many guidelines relating to glycaemic management, though there are signs of awareness and concern with its implications.
CONCLUSIONS: Those seeking to digitalise guidelines by making them \'computable\' need to acknowledge and address their inbuilt preference-sensitivity - if they wish to further care that respects patient\'s preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Given a lack of data on diabetes care performance in Malaysia, we conducted a cross-sectional study to understand the clinical characteristics, control of cardiometabolic risk factors, and patterns of use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), who were managed at publicly-funded hospitals between December 2021 and June 2022.
METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with T2D from eight publicly-funded hospitals in the Greater Kuala Lumpur region, who had ≥2 outpatient visits within the preceding year and irrespective of treatment regimen, were eligible. The primary outcome was ≥2 treatment target attainment (defined as either HbA1c <7.0%, blood pressure [BP] <130/80 mmHg, or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] <1.8 mmol/L). The secondary outcomes were the individual treatment target, a combination of all three treatment targets, and patterns of GDMT use. To assess for potential heterogeneity of study findings, all outcomes were stratified according to prespecified baseline characteristics namely 1) history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD; yes/no) and 2) clinic type (Diabetes specialist versus General medicine).
RESULTS: Among 5094 patients (mean±SD age 59.0±13.2 years; T2D duration 14.8±9.2 years; HbA1c 8.2±1.9% (66±21 mmol/mol); BMI 29.6±6.2 kg/m2; 45.6% men), 99% were at high/very high cardiorenal risk. Attainment of ≥2 treatment targets was at 18%, being higher in General medicine than in Diabetes specialist clinics (20.8% versus 17.5%; p = 0.039). The overall statin coverage was 90%. More patients with prior ASCVD attained LDL-C <1.4 mmol/L than those without (13.5% versus 8.4%; p<0.001). Use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors (13.2% versus 43.2%), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) (1.0% versus 6.2%), and insulin (27.7% versus 58.1%) were lower in General medicine than in Diabetes specialist clinics.
CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients with T2D, treatment target attainment and use of GDMT were suboptimal.

According to the \"Federal Law on the Fundamentals of Protection of the Public Health\", medical care for patients should be provided in accordance with National Russian guidelines for the relevant nosology, which are based on the principles of evidence-based medicine. The article presents an analysis of the compliance with the completeness of implementation of National Russian guidelines in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM 2) in real clinical practice. The analysis of the actual state of management of DM 2 patients was carried out from the Federal Register of diabetes as of 01.01.2023. Incomplete compliance with the guidelines on the frequency of measuring glycated hemoglobin, the rate of intensification of hypoglycemic therapy, and the appointment of new classes of hypoglycemic drugs was established. Possible reasons for the identified discrepancies between real practice and guidelines requirements are discussed, as well as possible measures to overcome these discrepancies.
Согласно Федеральному закону №323-ФЗ «Об основах охраны здоровья граждан в Российской Федерации» медицинская помощь пациентам должна быть оказана в соответствии с клиническими рекомендациями (КР) по соответствующей нозологии, которые основываются на принципах доказательной медицины. В данной статье представлен анализ соответствия полноты выполнения КР по лечению больных сахарным диабетом (СД) 2-го типа, утвержденных Минздравом России, в реальной клинической практике. Анализ фактического состояния ведения пациентов с СД 2-го типа проведен на основе данных Федерального регистра больных СД на 01.01.2023. Установлено неполное соответствие выполнения КР в частоте измерений гликированного гемоглобина, скорости интенсификации терапии, доли назначений современных классов сахароснижающих препаратов. Обсуждаются возможные причины выявленных расхождений реальной практики с требованиями КР, а также возможные меры по преодолению этих расхождений.

This study aimed at evaluating diabetic control and compliance with testing guidelines, across healthcare facilities of Gauteng Province, South Africa, as well as factors associated with time to achieve control. South Africa\'s estimated total unmet need for care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is 80%.
The data of 511 781 patients were longitudinally evaluated. Results were reported by year, age category, race, sex, facility and test types. HbA1C of ≤7% was reported as normal, >7 - ≤9% as poor control and >9% as very poor control. The chi-squared test was used to assess the association between a first-ever HbA1C status and variables listed above. The Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess probability of attaining control among those who started with out-of-control HbA1C. The extended Cox regression model assessed the association between time to attaining HbA1C control from date of treatment initiation and several covariates. We reported hazard ratios, 95% confidence intervals and p-values. Data is reported for 511 781 patients with 705 597 laboratory results. Poorly controlled patients constituted 51.5%, with 29.6% classified as very poor control. Most poorly controlled patients had only one test over the entire study period. Amongst those who started with poor control status and had at least two follow-up measurements, the likelihood of achieving good control was higher in males (adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR) = 1.16; 95% CI:1.12-1.20; p<0.001) and in those attending care at hospitals (aHR = 1.99; 95% CI:1.92-2.06; p<0.001).
This study highlights poor adherence to guidelines for diabetes monitoring.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.
Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.
The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.
An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.
Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.
The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.