Search

This randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study assessed the effects of addition of the dual peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) α/γ agonist, tesaglitazar, for 24 weeks to the therapeutic regimen of 392 poorly controlled (glycosylated haemoglobin [HbA1C] 7.5-10%) insulin-treated, type 2 diabetes patients. At 24 weeks, tesaglitazar 0.5 mg resulted in a 0.66% (95% confidence intervals: −0.85, −0.47; p The clinical development of tesaglitazar is no longer continuing; its effects on the glucose and lipid abnormalities of type 2 diabetes suggest that the concept of dual PPARα/γ agonism is worthy of further investigation.

Expansion of the team approach to diabetes care will most likely have significant ramifications in malpractice liability law as applied to diabetes educators, physicians, treatment teams, and supporting hospitals. This analysis focuses on the nature of the team approach to diabetes care, nationally promulgated standards for its practice, and predictions of the parameters of malpractice law. The estab lishment of a national certifi cation procedure identifies specialists in diabetes education, allowing for the expanded roles of diabetes educators, and promotes a minimum standard of care to which practitioners may be held. Likewise, the criteria for recog nition by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) serve as guide lines for diabetes education programs. Current legal. decisions suggest that these standards may be applied nationally as measures of malpractice liability. Application of certification guidelines may minimize allegations of malpractice.