Vascular Outcomes in Patients With Screen-Detected or Clinically Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes: Diabscreen Study Follow-up

PURPOSE

Screening guidelines for type 2 diabetes recommend targeting high-risk individuals. Our objective was to assess whether diagnosis of type 2 diabetes based on opportunistic targeted screening results in lower vascular event rates compared with diagnosis on the basis of clinical signs or symptoms.

METHODS

In a prospective, nonrandomized, observational study, we enrolled patients aged 45 to 75 years from 10 family practices in the Netherlands with a new diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, detected either by (1) opportunistic targeted screening (n = 359) or (2) clinical signs or symptoms (n = 206). Patients in both groups received the same guideline-concordant diabetes care. The main group outcome measure was a composite of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD), nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke.

RESULTS

Baseline vascular disease was more prevalent in the opportunistic targeted screening group, mainly ischemic heart disease (12.3% vs 3.9%, P = .001) and nephropathy (16.9% vs 7.1%, P = .002). After a mean follow-up of 7.7 years (SD = 2.4 years) and 7.1 years (SD = 2.7 years) for the opportunistic targeted screening and clinical diagnosis groups, respectively, composite primary event rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (9.5% vs 10.2%, P = .78; adjusted hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval, 0.36–1.25; P = .21). There were also no significant differences in the separate event rates of deaths from CVD, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal strokes.

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunistic targeted screening for type 2 diabetes detected patients with higher CVD morbidity at baseline when compared with clinical diagnosis but showed similar CVD mortality and major CVD morbidity after 7.7 years. Opportunistic targeted screening and guided care appears to improve vascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes in primary care.     

Multimorbidity in Patients Attending 2 Australian Primary Care Practices

PURPOSE

Multiple chronic conditions in a single patient can be a challenging health burden. We aimed to examine patterns and prevalence of multimorbidity among patients attending 2 large Australian primary care practices and to estimate disease severity burden using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS).

METHODS

Using published CIRS guidelines and a disease severity index calculated for each individual, we extracted data from the medical records of all 7,247 patients (58.5% female) seen over 6 months in 2008 who were rated for chronic conditions across 14 anatomical domains.

RESULTS

Fifty-two percent of patients had multimorbidity in 2 or more CIRS domains, ranging from 20.6% if younger than 25 years, 43.7% if aged 25 to 44 years, 75.5% if aged 45 to 64 years, 87.5% if aged 65 to 74 years, and 97.1% if aged 75 years and older. Using a cutoff of 3 or more CIRS domains, 34.5% had multimorbidity ranging from 4.8% if younger than 25 years, 22.3% if aged 25 to 44 years, 56.1% if aged 45 to 64 years, 74.6% if aged 65 to 74 years, and 92.0% if aged 75 years and older. Musculoskeletal, singularly or in combination with others, was the commonest morbidity domain. The moderate severity index category increased with increasing age.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimorbidity is a significant problem in men and women across all age-groups, and the moderate severity index increases with age. The musculoskeletal domain was most commonly affected. Mild and moderate severity index categories may underrepresent disease burden. Severity burden assessment in the primary care setting needs to take into account the severity index, as well as levels of domain severity within the index categories.     

Multimorbidity's research challenges and priorities from a clinical perspective: The case of ‘Mr Curran’

Older patients, suffering from numerous diseases and taking multiple medications are the rule rather than the exception in primary care. A manifold of medical conditions are often associated with poor outcomes, and their multiple medications raise additional risks of polypharmacy. Such patients account for most healthcare expenditures. Effective approaches are needed to manage such complex patients in primary care. This paper describes the results of a scoping exercise, including a two-day workshop with 17 professionals from six countries, experienced in general practice and primary care research as well as epidemiology, clinical pharmacology, gerontology and methodology. This was followed by a consensus process investigating the challenges and core questions for multimorbidity research in primary care from a clinical perspective and presents examples of the best research practice. Current approaches in measuring and clustering multimorbidity inform policy-makers and researchers, but research is needed to provide support in clinical decision making. Multimorbidity presents a complexity of conditions leading to individual patient's needs and demanding complex processes in clinical decision making. The identification of patterns presupposes the development of strategies on how to manage multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Interventions have to be complex and multifaceted, and their evaluation poses numerous methodological challenges in study design, outcome measurement and analysis. Overall, it can be seen that complexity is a main underlying theme. Moreover, flexible study designs, outcome parameters and evaluation strategies are needed to account for this complexity.     

Effectiveness of a Hospital-at-Home Integrated Care Program as Alternative Resource for Medical Crises Care in Older Adults With Complex Chronic Conditions

Objectives

To compare clinical outcomes in older patients with acute medical crises attended by a geriatrician-led home hospitalization unit (HHU) vs an inpatient intermediate-care geriatric unit (ICGU) in a post-acute care setting.