Search

The past three decades have seen a quadruple rise in the number of people affected by diabetes mellitus worldwide, with the disease being the ninth major cause of mortality. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often remains undiagnosed for several years due to its asymptomatic nature during the initial stages. In India, 70% of diagnosed diabetes cases remain uncontrolled. Current guidelines endorse the initiation of insulin early in the course of the disease, specifically in patients with HbA1c > 10%, as the use of oral agents alone is unlikely to achieve glycemic targets. Early insulin initiation and optimization of glycemic control using insulin titration algorithms and patient empowerment can facilitate the effective management of uncontrolled diabetes. Early glucose control has sustained benefits in people with diabetes. However, insulin initiation, dose adjustment, and the need to repeatedly assess blood glucose levels are often perplexing for both physicians and patients, and there are misconceptions and concerns regarding its use. Hence, an early transition to insulin and ideal intensification of treatment may aid in delaying the onset of diabetes complications. This opinion statement was formulated by an expert panel on the basis of existing guidelines, clinical experience, and economic and cultural contexts. The statement stresses the timely and appropriate use of basal insulin in T2DM. It focuses on the seven vital Ts—treatment initiation, timing of administration, transportation and storage, technique of administration, targets for titration, tablets, and tools for monitoring. Funding: Sanofi.

To date, insulin therapy remains the cornerstone of diabetes management; but the art of injecting insulin is still poorly understood in many health facilities. To address this gap, the Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations (FITTER) published recommendations on injection technique after a workshop held in Rome, Italy in 2015. These recommendations are generally applicable to the majority of patients on insulin therapy, athough they do not explore alternative details that may be suitable for low- and middle-income countries. The East Africa Diabetes Study Group sought to address this gap, and furthermore to seek consensus on some of the contextual issues pertaining to insulin therapy within the East African region, specifically focusing on scarcity of resources and its adverse effect on the quality of care. A meeting of health care professionals, experts in diabetes management and patients using insulin, was convened in Kigali, Rwanda on 11 March 2018, and the following recommendations were made: (1) insulin should be transported safely, without undue shaking and exposure to high (> 32 °C) temperature environments. (2) Insulin should not be transported below 0 °C. (3) If insulin is to be stored at home for over 2 months, it should be stored at the recommended temperature of 2–8 °C. (4) Appropriate instructions should be given to patients while dispensing insulin. (5) Insulin in use should be kept at room temperature and should never be kept immersed under water. Immersing insulin under water after the vial has been pierced carries a high risk of contamination, leading to loss of potency and likelihood of causing injection abscesses. (6) The shortest available needles (4 mm for pen and 6 mm for insulin syringe) should be preferred for all patients. (7) In routine care, intramuscular injections should be avoided, especially with long-acting insulins, as it may result in severe hypoglycaemia. (8) The practice of slanting the needle excessively should be avoided as it results in sub-epidermal injection of insulin which leads to poor absorption and may cause “tattooing” of the skin and scarring. (9) In patients presenting in a wasted state, with “paper-like skin”, injections should, if possible, be initiated with pen injection devices, so as to utilise the 4-mm needle without lifting a skin fold (pinching the skin); otherwise lifting of a skin fold is required, if longer needles are utilised. (10) Reuse of needles and syringes is not recommended. However, as the reuse of syringes and needles is practiced for various reasons, and by many patients, individuals should not be given alarming messages; and usage should be limited to discarding when injections become more painful; but at any rate not to exceed reusing a needle more than 5 times. Electronic Supplementary Material The online version of this article (10.1007/s13300-019-0574-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Hypertension is a major public health challenge affecting more than one billion people worldwide; it disproportionately affects populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where health systems are generally weak. The increasing prevalence of hypertension is associated with population growth, ageing, genetic factors, and behavioural risk factors, such as excessive salt and fat consumption, physical inactivity, being overweight and obese, harmful alcohol consumption, and poor management of stress. Over the long term, hypertension leads to risk for cardiovascular events, such as heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, disability, and premature mortality. Cardiovascular events can be preventable when high-risk populations are targeted, for example, through population-wide screening strategies. When available resources are limited, taking a total risk approach whereby several risk factors of hypertension are taken into consideration (e.g. age, gender, lifestyle factors, diabetes, blood cholesterol) can enable more accurate targeting of high-risk groups. Targeting of high-risk groups can help reduce costs in that resources are not spent on the entire population. Early detection in the form of screening for hypertension (and associated risk factors) can help identify high-risk groups, which can result in timely treatment and management of risk factors. Ultimately, early detection can help reduce morbidity and mortality linked to it and can help contain health-related costs, for example, those associated with hospitalisation due to severe illness and poorly managed risk factors and comorbidities. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of different screening strategies for hypertension (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension. Search methods An Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS-Web), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) Bireme, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) without language, publication year, or publication status restrictions. The searches were conducted from inception until 9 April 2020. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs (NRCTs), that is, controlled before and after (CBA), interrupted time series (ITS), and prospective analytic cohort studies of healthy adolescents, adults, and elderly people participating in mass, targeted, or opportunistic screening of hypertension. Data collection and analysis Screening of all retrieved studies was done in Covidence. A team of reviewers, in pairs, independently assessed titles and abstracts of identified studies and acquired full texts for studies that were potentially eligible. Studies were deemed to be eligible for full-text screening if two review authors agreed, or if consensus was reached through discussion with a third review author. It was planned that at least two review authors would independently extract data from included studies, assess risk of bias using pre-specified Cochrane criteria, and conduct a meta-analysis of sufficiently similar studies or present a narrative synthesis of the results. Main results We screened 9335 titles and abstracts. We identified 54 potentially eligible studies for full-text screening. However, no studies met the eligibility criteria. Authors' conclusions There is an implicit assumption that early detection of hypertension through screening can reduce the burden of morbidity and mortality, but this assumption has not been tested in rigorous research studies. High-quality evidence from RCTs or programmatic evidence from NRCTs on the effectiveness and costs or harms of different screening strategies for hypertension (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) to reduce hypertension-related morbidity and mortality is lacking.

IntroductionIt is unclear whether early detection of hypertension, through screening, leads to healthier behaviours and better control of blood pressure levels. There is a need to learn from studies that have assessed the impact of different screening approaches on patient important outcomes. This systematic review protocol outlines the methods that will be used to assess the comparative effectiveness of different screening strategies (mass, targeted or opportunistic) for hypertension to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension.Methods and analysisWe will primarily search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS). Relevant randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after, interrupted time series and prospective analytic cohort studies regardless of publication date, language and geographic location, will be included. We are interested in clinical, adverse event and health system outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles against inclusion criteria; perform data extraction and assess risk of bias in included studies. We will assess the certainty of the overall evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach and report findings accordingly.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval will be sought, as only secondary studies will be used. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018093046.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of different screening strategies for hypertension (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension.

Background In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is growing against an existing burden of other diseases such as HIV/AIDS. Integrated models of care can help address the rising burden of multi-morbidity. Although integration of care can occur at various levels and has been defined in numerous ways, our aim is to assess the effects of integration of service delivery at primary healthcare level in LMICs. Methods We will consider randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series that examine integrated models of care among people with multi-morbidities, of which diabetes or hypertension is one, living in LMICs. We will compare fully integrated models of care to stand-alone care, partially integrated models of care to stand-alone care and fully integrated models to partially integrated models of care. Primary outcomes include all-cause mortality, disease-specific morbidity, HbA1c, systolic blood pressure and cholesterol levels. Secondary outcomes include access to care, retention in care, adherence, continuity of care, quality of care and cost of care. We will conduct a comprehensive search in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials, LILACS, Africa-Wide Information, CINAHL and Web of Science. In addition, we will search trial registries, relevant conference abstracts and check references lists of included studies. Selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias will be performed independently by two review authors. We will resolve discrepancies through discussion with a third author. We will contact study authors in case of missing data. If included studies are sufficiently homogenous, we will pool results in a meta-analysis. Clinical heterogeneity related to the population, intervention, outcomes and context will be documented in table format and explored through subgroup analysis. We will assess χ2and I2 tests for statistical heterogeneity. We will use GRADE to make judgements about the certainty of evidence and present findings in a summary of findings table. Discussion In light of limited evidence on the provision of comprehensive care for diabetes and hypertension, and its comorbidity in LMCIs, we believe that the findings of this systematic review will provide a synthesis of evidence on effective models of integrated care for diabetes and hypertension and their comorbidities at primary healthcare level. This will enable policy-makers to device policies and programs that are evidence informed. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018099314. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-018-0865-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.