Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Value of Patient-Centered Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

  • Economics and Policy in Diabetes (AA Baig and N Laiteerapong, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Diabetes Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of review

Present the value of a person-centered approach in diabetes management and review current evidence supporting its practice.

Recent findings

Early evidence from glycemic control trials in diabetes resulted in most practice guidelines adopting a glucose-centric intensive approach for management of the disease, consistently relying on HbA1c as a marker of metabolic control and success. This paradigm has been recently dispelled by new evidence that shows that intensive glycemic control does not provide a significant benefit regarding patient-important microvascular and macrovascular hard outcomes when compared to moderate glycemic targets.

Summary

The goals of diabetes therapy are to reduce the risks of acute and chronic complications and increase quality of life while incurring least burden of treatment and disruption to the patient’s life. A person-centered approach to diabetes management is achieved through shared decision making, integration of evidence-based care and patient´s needs, values and preferences, and minimally disruptive approaches to diabetes care and at the same time offer practical guidance to clinicians and patients on achieving this type of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Organization WH. Factsheet/Diabetes World Health Organization2021 [cited 2021 21/05/2021]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes.

  2. Organization WH. Diabetes Infographic 2016 [cited 2021 05/14/2021]. Available from: https://www.who.int/diabetes/global-report/WHD2016_Diabetes_Infographic_v2.pdf?ua=1.

  3. Prevention CfDCa. Type 2 Diabetes 2019 [cited 2021 05/14/2021]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/type2.html.

  4. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes 2021 Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2021 Diabetes care. 44 Supplement 1 S15

  5. Hardin RC, Jackson RL, Johnston TL, Kelly HG. The development of diabetic retinopathy; effects of duration and control of diabetes. Diabetes. 1956;5(5):397–405.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Keiding NR, Root HF, Marble A. Importance of control of diabetes in prevention of vascular complications. J Am Med Assoc. 1952;150(10):964–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HA, Matthews DR, Manley SE, Cull CA, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2000;321(7258):405–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Adler AI, Stevens RJ, Manley SE, Bilous RW, Cull CA, Holman RR. Development and progression of nephropathy in type 2 diabetes: the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS 64). Kidney Int. 2003;63(1):225–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Frank RN. Diabetic retinopathy. New Engl J Med. 2004;350(1):48–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dyck PJ, Kratz KM, Karnes JL, Litchy WJ, Klein R, Pach JM, et al. The prevalence by staged severity of various types of diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy in a population-based cohort: the Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study. Neurology. 1993;43(4):817–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Morris AD, McAlpine R, Steinke D, Boyle DI, Ebrahim AR, Vasudev N, et al. Diabetes and lower-limb amputations in the community. A retrospective cohort study. DARTS/MEMO Collaboration. Diabetes Audit and Research in Tayside Scotland/Medicines Monitoring Unit. Diabetes Care. 1998;21(5):738-43.

  12. Chen R, Ovbiagele B, Feng W. Diabetes and Stroke: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Pharmaceuticals and Outcomes. Am J Med Sci. 2016;351(4):380–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Pazin-Filho A, Kottgen A, Bertoni AG, Russell SD, Selvin E, Rosamond WD, et al. HbA 1c as a risk factor for heart failure in persons with diabetes: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Diabetologia. 2008;51(12):2197–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Selvin E, Marinopoulos S, Berkenblit G, Rami T, Brancati FL, Powe NR, et al. Meta-analysis: glycosylated hemoglobin and cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus. Ann Int Med. 2004;141(6):421–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Glycemic Targets 2019 Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019 Diabetes care. 42 Supplement 1 S61

  16. The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: the AACE system of intensive diabetes self-management--2000 update. Endocrine Pract. 2000;6(1):43-84.

  17. US Veterans Affairs DoD. VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Primary Care 2017 [cited 2021 3/3/2021]. Available from: https://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/cd/diabetes/.

  18. Excellence NIfHaC. Type 2 diabetes in adults: management NICE2015 [cited 2021 3/3/2021]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng28.

  19. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Kansagara D, Horwitch C, Barry MJ, Forciea MA. Hemoglobin A1c Targets for Glycemic Control With Pharmacologic Therapy for Nonpregnant Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Guidance Statement Update From the American College of Physicians. Ann Int Med. 2018;168(8):569–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Lipska KJ, McCoy RG. Intensive Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus – A Balancing Act of Latent Benefit and Avoidable Harm: A Teachable Moment. JAMA Int Med. 2016;176(3):300–1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Gonzalez-Gonzalez JG, Zuñiga-Hernandez JA, McCoy RG. Benefits and harms of intensive glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2019;367.

  22. Espinoza P, Varela CA, Vargas IE, Ortega G, Silva PA, Boehmer KB, et al. The burden of treatment in people living with type 2 diabetes: A qualitative study of patients and their primary care clinicians. PloS one. 2020;15(10):e0241485.

  23. Serrano Larrea V, Spencer G, Boehmer K, Montori V. Minimally Disruptive Medicine for Patients with Diabetes. 2017.

  24. Leppin AL, Montori VM, Gionfriddo MR. Minimally Disruptive Medicine: A Pragmatically Comprehensive Model for Delivering Care to Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions. Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland). 2015;3(1):50–63.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. American Diabetes A. Postprandial Blood Glucose Diabetes Care. 2001;24(4):775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. •• Rodríguez-Gutiérrez R, Montori VM. Glycemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: our evolving faith in the face of evidence. Circulation. 2016;9(5):504-12. Meta-analysis that reported no significant impact of tight glycemic control on the risk of dialysis/transplantation/renal death, blindness, or neuropathy even when most published statements from medical associations endorsed benefit.

  27. Group UPDS. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998;352(9131):837–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, Kernan WN, Mathieu C, Mingrone G, et al. Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2018;41(12):2669.

  29. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, Buroker AB, Goldberger ZD, Hahn EJ, et al. 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2019;140(11):e596–646.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Garber AJ, Handelsman Y, Grunberger G, Einhorn D, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, et al. Consensus statement by the american association of clinical endocrinologists and american college of endocrinology on the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm - 2020 executive summary. Endoc Pract. 2020;26(1):107–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus. New Engl J Med. 1993;329(14):977-86.

  32. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HAW. 10-Year Follow-up of Intensive Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. New Engl J Med. 2008;359(15):1577–89.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ohkubo Y, Kishikawa H, Araki E, Miyata T, Isami S, Motoyoshi S, et al. Intensive insulin therapy prevents the progression of diabetic microvascular complications in Japanese patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a randomized prospective 6-year study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1995;28(2):103–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT): results of feasibility study. The DCCT Research Group. Diabetes Care. 1987;10(1):1-19.

  35. Nathan DM, Group DER. The diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complications study at 30 years: overview. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(1):9–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Association AD. Standards of medical care for patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(1):213–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Song SH, Gray TA. Management of type 2 diabetes and lipids: a critique of the NICE guidelines 2008. Brit J Diabetes Vasc Dis. 2009;9(2):69–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Force ICGT. Global Guideline for Type 2 Diabetes: recommendations for standard, comprehensive, and minimal care. Diabetic Med. 2006;23(6):579–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, Cleary P, Crofford O, Davis M, et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. New Engl J Med. 1993;329(14):977–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Handelsman Y, Bloomgarden ZT, Grunberger G, Umpierrez G, Zimmerman RS, Bailey TS, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology–clinical practice guidelines for developing a diabetes mellitus comprehensive care plan–2015—executive summary. Endoc Pract. 2015;21(4):413–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Association AD. 6. Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2021. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(Supplement 1):S73-S84.

  42. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Kansagara D, Horwitch C, Barry MJ, Forciea MA. Hemoglobin A1c Targets for Glycemic Control With Pharmacologic Therapy for Nonpregnant Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Guidance Statement Update From the American College of Physicians. Ann Int Med2018;168(8):569–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Kahn SE, Krause-Steinrauf H, Larkin ME, Staten M, et al. Rationale and design of the glycemia reduction approaches in diabetes: a comparative effectiveness study (GRADE). Diabetes Care. 2013;36(8):2254–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. LaVecchia CM, Montori VM, Shah ND, McCoy RG. Values informing the development of an indicator of appropriate diabetes therapy: qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(12):e044395.

  45. MNCM. Minnesota community measurement data collection guide: optimal diabetes care specifications, 2019 report year (01/01/2018 to 12/31/2018 dates of service). 2018.

  46. Toroski M, Kebriaeezadeh A, Esteghamati A, Karyani AK, Abbasian H, Nikfar S. Patient and physician preferences for type 2 diabetes medications: a systematic review. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2019;18(2):643–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. • Murad MH, Shah ND, Van Houten HK, Ziegenfuss JY, Deming JR, Beebe TJ, et al. Individuals with diabetes preferred that future trials use patient-important outcomes and provide pragmatic inferences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(7):743–8. Survey on 2,036 patients with diabetes that reported a strong preference for trials using patient-important outcomes as primary outcomes rather than HbA1c.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Montori VM, Gandhi GY, Guyatt GH. Patient-important outcomes in diabetes–time for consensus. Lancet (London, England). 2007;370(9593):1104–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Yudkin JS, Lipska KJ, Montori VM. The idolatry of the surrogate. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2011;343:d7995.

  50. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, McCoy RG. Measuring What Matters in Diabetes. JAMA. 2019;321(19):1865–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Fleming TR. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. Drug Inf J. 1996;30(2):545–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. • Dorsey-Treviño EG, Alvarez-Villalobos N, González-González JG, González-Colmenero AD, Barrera-Flores FJ, McCoy RG, et al. Outcomes that patients perceive and value are systematically unassessed in randomized clinical trials of endocrine-related illnesses: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;106:140–3. Meta-epidemiological study that demonstrated a scarcity of assessment of patient-important outcomes in clinical trials of endocrine-related illnesses.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Boussageon R, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Saadatian-Elahi M, Lafont S, Bergeonneau C, Kassaï B, et al. Effect of intensive glucose lowering treatment on all cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and microvascular events in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2011;343.

  54. Coca SG, Ismail-Beigi F, Haq N, Krumholz HM, Parikh CR. Role of intensive glucose control in development of renal end points in type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Int Med. 2012;172(10):761–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Buehler AM, Cavalcanti AB, Berwanger O, Figueiro M, Laranjeira LN, Zazula AD, et al. Effect of tight blood glucose control versus conventional control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cardiovas Therap. 2013;31(3):147–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hemmingsen B, Lund SS, Gluud C, Vaag A, Almdal T, Hemmingsen C, et al. Intensive glycaemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2011;343.

  57. Herrera-Gómez F, Asensio-González M, González-López A, Álvarez FJ. Effects of Intensive Control of Glycemia on Clinical Kidney Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Compared with Standard Control: A Meta-Analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2017;8:845.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Kelly TN, Bazzano LA, Fonseca VA, Thethi TK, Reynolds K, He J. Systematic review: glucose control and cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes. Ann Int Med 2009;151(6):394–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Montori VM, Fernández-Balsells M. Glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: time for an evidence-based about-face? Ann Int Med 2009;150(11):803–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Ray KK, Seshasai SR, Wijesuriya S, Sivakumaran R, Nethercott S, Preiss D, et al. Effect of intensive control of glucose on cardiovascular outcomes and death in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet (London, England). 2009;373(9677):1765–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Sardar P, Udell JA, Chatterjee S, Bansilal S, Mukherjee D, Farkouh ME. Effect of Intensive Versus Standard Blood Glucose Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Different Regions of the World: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(5).

  62. Tkác I. Effect of intensive glycemic control on cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes: Overview and metaanalysis of five trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2009;86(Suppl 1):S57-62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Zhang X, Zhao J, Zhao T, Liu H. Effects of intensive glycemic control in ocular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Endocrine. 2015;49(1):78–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Lipska KJ, McCoy RG, Ospina NS, Ting HH, Montori, Victor M. Hypoglycemia as an indicator of good diabetes care. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2016;352:i1084.

  65. Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC). Design, implementation, and preliminary results of a long-term follow-up of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial cohort. Diabetes Care. 1999;22(1):99-111.

  66. Skyler JS, Bakris GL, Bonifacio E. Differentiation of Diabetes by Pathophysiology. Nat Hist Progn. 2017;66(2):241–55.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Piette JD, Kerr EA. The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on diabetes care. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(3):725–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. McCoy RG, Lipska KJ, Van Houten HK, Shah ND. Paradox of glycemic management: multimorbidity, glycemic control, and high-risk medication use among adults with diabetes. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020;8(1):e001007.

  69. Nowakowska M, Zghebi SS, Ashcroft DM, Buchan I, Chew-Graham C, Holt T, et al. The comorbidity burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus: patterns, clusters and predictions from a large English primary care cohort. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Hermans MP, Dath N. Prevalence and co-prevalence of comorbidities in Belgian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a transversal, descriptive study. Acta Clin Belgica. 2018;73(1):68–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Jelinek HF, Osman WM, Khandoker AH, Khalaf K, Lee S, Almahmeed W, et al. Clinical profiles, comorbidities and complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients from United Arab Emirates. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2017;5(1).

  72. Lin P-J, Pope E, Zhou FL. Comorbidity type and health care costs in type 2 diabetes: a retrospective claims database analysis. Diabetes Therapy. 2018;9(5):1907–18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Pashaki MS, Mezel JA, Mokhtari Z, Gheshlagh RG, Hesabi PS, Nematifard T, et al. The prevalence of comorbid depression in patients with diabetes: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetes Metab Syndrome. 2019;13(6):3113–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Khaledi M, Haghighatdoost F, Feizi A, Aminorroaya A. The prevalence of comorbid depression in patients with type 2 diabetes: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on huge number of observational studies. Acta Diabetol. 2019;56(6):631–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Winston AP. Eating Disorders and Diabetes. Curr Diabetes Rep. 2020;20(8):32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Buchberger B, Huppertz H, Krabbe L, Lux B, Mattivi JT, Siafarikas A. Symptoms of depression and anxiety in youth with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016;70:70–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Russell LB, Suh DC, Safford MA. Time requirements for diabetes self-management: too much for many? J Family Pract. 2005;54(1):52–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268(17):2420-5.

  79. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 1996;312(7023):71–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Straus SE, Sackett DL. Applying evidence to the individual patient. Ann Oncol. 1999;10(1):29–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Stiggelbout AM, Van der Weijden T, De Wit MP, Frosch D, Légaré F, Montori VM, et al. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2012;344:e256.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med (1982). 1999;49(5):651-61.

  83. Elwyn G, Lloyd A, May C, van der Weijden T, Stiggelbout A, Edwards A, et al. Collaborative deliberation: a model for patient care. Patient Educ Counsel. 2014;97(2):158–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Gionfriddo MR, Ospina NS, Maraka S, Tamhane S, Montori VM, et al. Shared decision making in endocrinology: present and future directions. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(8):706–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Guyatt GMM, Rennie D, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care in A. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US)

  87. Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.; 2001.

  88. Drake RE, Deegan PE. Shared decision making is an ethical imperative. Psychiatric services (Washington, DC). 2009;60(8):1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Agoritsas T, Heen AF, Brandt L, Alonso-Coello P, Kristiansen A, Akl EA, et al. Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2015;350:g7624.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane database Syst Rev. 2014(1):Cd001431.

  91. Durand MA, Carpenter L, Dolan H, Bravo P, Mann M, Bunn F, et al. Do interventions designed to support shared decision-making reduce health inequalities? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one. 2014;9(4):e94670.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Mann DM, Ponieman D, Montori VM, Arciniega J, McGinn T. The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care: a randomized trial. Patient Educ Counsel. 2010;80(1):138–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Fraenkel L, Street RL Jr, Towle V, O’Leary JR, Iannone L, Van Ness PH, et al. A pilot randomized controlled trial of a decision support tool to improve the quality of communication and decision-making in individuals with atrial fibrillation. J Am Geriatr Society. 2012;60(8):1434–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Thomson RG, Eccles MP, Steen IN, Greenaway J, Stobbart L, Murtagh MJ, et al. A patient decision aid to support shared decision-making on anti-thrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation: randomised controlled trial. Qual Saf Health Care. 2007;16(3):216–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Mullan RJ, Montori VM, Shah ND, Christianson TJ, Bryant SC, Guyatt GH, et al. The diabetes mellitus medication choice decision aid: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(17):1560–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Mathers N, Ng CJ, Campbell MJ, Colwell B, Brown I, Bradley A. Clinical effectiveness of a patient decision aid to improve decision quality and glycaemic control in people with diabetes making treatment choices: a cluster randomised controlled trial (PANDAs) in general practice. BMJ Open. 2012;2(6).

  97. Man-Son-Hing M, Laupacis A, O’Connor AM, Biggs J, Drake E, Yetisir E, et al. A patient decision aid regarding antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1999;282(8):737–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Loh A, Simon D, Wills CE, Kriston L, Niebling W, Härter M. The effects of a shared decision-making intervention in primary care of depression: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Counsel. 2007;67(3):324–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Boehmer KR, Dobler CC, Thota A, Branda M, Giblon R, Behnken E, et al. Changing conversations in primary care for patients living with chronic conditions: pilot and feasibility study of the ICAN Discussion Aid. BMJ Open. 2019;9(9):e029105.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Excellence NIfHaC. Type 2 diabetes in adults: controlling your blood glucose by taking a second medicine – what are your options? 2015 [05/21/2021]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng28/resources/patient-decision-aid-2187281197.

  101. Healthwise. Diabetes, Type 2: Should I take insulin? : Healthwise; 2020 [05/21/2021]. Available from: https://www.healthwise.org.

  102. Healthwise. Diabetes: Should I Get an Insulin Pump? : Healthwise; 2020 [05/21/2021]. Available from: https://www.healthwise.org.

  103. Healthwise. Diabetes: Should I Get Pregnant? : Healthwise; 2020 [05/21/2021]. Available from: https://www.healthwise.org.

  104. Excellence NIfHaC. Type 2 diabetes in adults: management: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2015 [05/21/2021]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng28/ifp/chapter/About-this-information.

  105. den Ouden H, Vos RC, Reidsma C, Rutten GE. Shared decision making in type 2 diabetes with a support decision tool that takes into account clinical factors, the intensity of treatment and patient preferences: design of a cluster randomised (OPTIMAL) trial. BMC Family Pract. 2015;16:27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Denig P, Dun M, Schuling J, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Voorham J. The effect of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid for risk factor management in patients with diabetes (PORTDA-diab): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2012;13:219.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Shillington AC, Col N, Bailey RA, Jewell MA. Development of a patient decision aid for type 2 diabetes mellitus for patients not achieving glycemic control on metformin alone. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:609–17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Gagné ME, Légaré F, Moisan J, Boulet LP. Development of a patient decision aid on inhaled corticosteroids use for adults with asthma. J Asthma. 2016;53(9):964–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. McCoy RG, Lipska KJ, Van Houten HK, Shah ND. Development and evaluation of a patient-centered quality indicator for the appropriateness of type 2 diabetes management. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020;8(2).

  110. Henderson VA, Barr KL, An LC, Guajardo C, Newhouse W, Mase R, et al. Community-based participatory research and user-centered design in a diabetes medication information and decision tool. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2013;7(2):171–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

RGM is funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) grant number K23DK114497. Study contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIH. The study sponsor had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Plataforma INVEST Medicina UANL-KER Unit Mayo Clinic (KER Unit México), Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Monterrey, Mexico

    René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, Juan Manuel Millan-Alanis & Francisco J. Barrera

  2. Endocrinology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital “Dr. José E. González”, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Francisco I. Madero y Av. Gonzalitos s/n, Mitras Centro, Monterrey, 64460, México

    René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez

  3. Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit in Endocrinology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez & Rozalina G. McCoy

  4. Division of Community Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Rozalina G. McCoy

  5. Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Rozalina G. McCoy

Authors
  1. René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan Manuel Millan-Alanis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francisco J. Barrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rozalina G. McCoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

In the past 36 months, Dr. McCoy also received research support from NIDDK (P30DK111024; R03DK127010), AARP (AARP® Quality Measure Innovation Grant through a collaboration with OptumLabs® and the NQF Measure Incubator™), and Mayo Clinic. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Economics and Policy in Diabetes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, R., Millan-Alanis, J.M., Barrera, F.J. et al. Value of Patient-Centered Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. Curr Diab Rep 21, 63 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-021-01433-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-021-01433-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation