Tseng Yi-Ju, Steinberg Gregory, Fox Kathe P, Armstrong Joanne, Mandl Kenneth D
Computational Health Informatics Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Department of Information Management, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan.
Diabetes Care. 2017 Nov;40(11):1500-1505. doi: 10.2337/dc17-0213. Epub 2017 Sep 13.
The American Diabetes Association recommends metformin as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes. However, nonadherence to antihyperglycemic medication is common, and a clinician could confuse nonadherence with pharmacologic failure, potentially leading to premature prescribing of second-line therapies. We measured metformin use prior to second-line therapy initialization.
This retrospective cross-sectional study used unidentifiable member claims data from individuals covered from 2010 to 2015 by Aetna, a U.S. health benefits company. Beneficiaries with two physician claims or one hospitalization with a type 2 diabetes diagnosis were included. Recommended use of metformin was measured by the proportion of days covered over 60 days. Through sensitivity analysis, we varied estimates of the percentage of beneficiaries who used low-cost generic prescription medication programs.
A total of 52,544 individuals with type 2 diabetes were eligible. Of 22,956 patients given second-line treatment, only 1,875 (8.2%) had evidence of recommended use of metformin in the prior 60 days, and 6,441 (28.0%) had no prior claims evidence of having taken metformin. At the top range of sensitivity, only 49.5% patients could have had recommended use. Patients were more likely to be given an additional second-line antihyperglycemic medication or insulin if they were given their initial second-line medication without evidence of recommended use of metformin ( < 0.001).
Despite published guidelines, second-line therapy often is initiated without evidence of recommended use of first-line therapy. Apparent treatment failures, which may in fact be attributable to nonadherence to guidelines, are common. Point-of-care and population-level processes are needed to monitor and improve guideline adherence.
美国糖尿病协会推荐二甲双胍作为2型糖尿病的一线治疗药物。然而,不坚持服用降糖药物的情况很常见,临床医生可能会将不依从与药物治疗失败相混淆,这可能导致过早开具二线治疗药物。我们在开始二线治疗之前对二甲双胍的使用情况进行了测量。
这项回顾性横断面研究使用了美国健康福利公司安泰(Aetna)2010年至2015年承保的个人不可识别的会员理赔数据。纳入有两次医生理赔记录或一次因2型糖尿病诊断而住院的受益人。通过60天内的覆盖天数比例来衡量二甲双胍的推荐使用情况。通过敏感性分析,我们改变了使用低成本通用处方药计划的受益人的百分比估计。
共有52544名2型糖尿病患者符合条件。在接受二线治疗的22956名患者中,只有1875名(8.2%)在之前60天有推荐使用二甲双胍的证据,6441名(28.0%)之前没有服用二甲双胍的理赔证据。在敏感性的最高范围内,只有49.5%的患者可能有推荐使用情况。如果患者在没有推荐使用二甲双胍证据的情况下接受初始二线药物治疗,他们更有可能被给予额外的二线降糖药物或胰岛素(<0.001)。
尽管有已发表的指南,但二线治疗往往在没有一线治疗推荐使用证据的情况下开始。明显的治疗失败很常见,而这实际上可能归因于不遵守指南。需要在医疗现场和人群层面进行监测和改进指南依从性的流程。