RESUMEN
AIMS: This open-label randomized controlled clinical trial compared the effect on glycaemic control and weight gain of repaglinide vs. gliclazide combined with bedtime NPH insulin in patients with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral hypoglycaemic therapy [HbA1c>7.0% (DCCT aligned assay, normal range 4.6-6.2%)]. METHODS: Eighty subjects with Type 2 diabetes were randomized to 13 weeks' open-label treatment with repaglinide 4 mg t.i.d. or gliclazide 160 mg b.i.d. in combination with bedtime NPH insulin (initial dose 0.5 units/kg). The fasting blood glucose (FBG) target was < or =6.0 mmol/l. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar for age, sex, weight, BMI, FBG and HbA1c. Glycaemic control improved similarly in both groups-insulin/gliclazide by (mean) 1.0%, from 9.2 to 8.2% (P=0.001) and by 0.9%, from 9.4 to 8.5% in the insulin/repaglinide group (P=0.005) (P=0.83 between groups). Weight gain averaged (mean +/- sem) 4.1 +/- 0.5 and 3.4 +/- 0.4 kg in the insulin/gliclazide and insulin/repaglinide groups, respectively (P<0.0001 for both groups from baseline) (P=0.29 between groups). The mean number of hypoglycaemic episodes experienced per patient was 2.95 +/- 0.82 (insulin/gliclazide) and 2.3 +/- 0.52 (insulin/repaglinide) (P=0.81 between groups). Both treatments were associated with significant improvements in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction [Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-potential range 0 (min) to 36 (max)]; in the insulin/gliclazide group, by 4.9 +/- 1.1 points to 33.3 +/- 0.6 (P<0.0001) and by 3.0 +/- 0.9 points to 34.6 +/- 0.4 (P=0.0006) in the insulin/repaglinide group (P=0.29 between groups). CONCLUSIONS: Over 13 weeks, both repaglinide and gliclazide, when combined with bedtime NPH insulin produce similar significant improvements in glycaemic control (-1%) and similar weight gain.
Asunto(s)
Carbamatos/uso terapéutico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Gliclazida/uso terapéutico , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Insulina Isófana/uso terapéutico , Piperidinas/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Glucemia/análisis , Carbamatos/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Gliclazida/efectos adversos , Hemoglobina A/análisis , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Insulina Isófana/efectos adversos , Masculino , Metformina/administración & dosificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Satisfacción del Paciente , Piperidinas/efectos adversos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Aumento de Peso/fisiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Debate exists about the optimum way to screen for diabetic retinopathy. Cameras produce a permanent record, but offer patients less choice about when and where to be screened. Optometrists offer flexibility but sensitivity and specificity of schemes have varied considerably, perhaps because of variability in screening methodology and that there is frequently no quality assurance programme. AIMS: To audit our district-wide (population 340000) screening programme for diabetic retinopathy against national targets: sensitivity > 80%, specificity > 95% and referral to review < 3 months. METHODS: Trained optometrists performed slit-lamp examination with Volk lenses (78 dioptre) with standardized reporting. Audit was by ophthalmologist with slit-lamp and Volk lenses through dilated pupils. RESULTS: We examined 872 eyes of 439 patients; 64% were normal, 29% background diabetic retinopathy, 7% sight-threatening eye disease (STED). Sixty-three percent of patients were seen within 6 months of the original screen. Of these, sensitivity for any retinopathy was 72%, specificity 77%, positive predictive value (PPV) 53%, negative predictive value (NPV) 88%. For STED, in this group, sensitivity was 87% and specificity 91%, PPV 30%, NPV 99%. Median interval referral to ophthalmological review was 11.5 weeks with 73% reviewed in under the 13-week target. Of those referred 25% received laser therapy. Eleven patients found to have referable eye disease at their initial screen were not referred to an ophthalmologist by their GP. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that effective district-wide screening for diabetic retinopathy by optometrists using slit-lamp and Volk lenses is possible; however, only 36% of identified people with diabetes in the district were screened over a 4-year period.