Cargando…

Antidiabetic treatment patterns and specialty care utilization among patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: To evaluate real-world patient characteristics, medication use, and health care utilization patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes with established cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes seen at Cleveland Clinic from 2005 to 20...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pantalone, Kevin M., Misra-Hebert, Anita D., Hobbs, Todd M., Ji, Xinge, Kong, Sheldon X., Milinovich, Alex, Weng, Wayne, Bauman, Janine, Ganguly, Rahul, Burguera, Bartolome, Kattan, Michael W., Zimmerman, Robert S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5892008/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29636104
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12933-018-0699-7
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To evaluate real-world patient characteristics, medication use, and health care utilization patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes with established cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes seen at Cleveland Clinic from 2005 to 2016, divided into two cohorts: with-CVD and without-CVD. Patient demographics and antidiabetic medications were recorded in December 2016; department encounters included all visits from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2016. Comorbidity burden was assessed by the diabetes complications severity index (DCSI) score. RESULTS: Of 95,569 patients with type 2 diabetes, 40,910 (42.8%) were identified as having established CVD. Patients with CVD vs. those without were older (median age 69.1 vs. 58.2 years), predominantly male (53.8% vs. 42.6%), and more likely to have Medicare insurance (69.4% vs. 35.3%). The with-CVD cohort had a higher proportion of patients with a DCSI score ≥ 3 than the without-CVD cohort (65.0% vs. 10.3%). Utilization rates of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium–glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors were low in both with-CVD (4.1 and 2.5%) and without-CVD cohorts (5.4 and 4.1%), respectively. The majority of patient visits (75%) were seen by a primary care provider. During the 1-year observation period, 81.9 and 62.0% of patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD were not seen by endocrinology or cardiology, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicated underutilization of specialists and antidiabetic medications reported to confer CV benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD. The impact of recently updated guidelines and cardiovascular outcome trial results on management patterns in such patients remains to be seen.