Search

Introduction: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is common in older age and in diabetes mellitus (DM). Phosphodiesterase type 5-inhibitors (PDE5-is) are the first-line for ED. We investigated how the type of diabetes and age of males affect the PDE5-i use in the primary care setting., Methods: From 2018 to 2019, the general practice level quantity of all PDE5-i agents was taken from the general practice (GP) Prescribing Dataset in England. The variation in outcomes across practices was examined across one year, and for the same practice against the previous year., Results: We included 5761 larger practices supporting 25.8 million men of whom 4.2 million ≥65 years old. Of these, 1.4 million had T2DM, with 0.8 million of these >65. About 137 000 people had T1DM. About 28.8 million tablets of PDE5-i were prescribed within the 12 months (2018-2019) period in 3.7 million prescriptions (7.7 tablets/prescription), at total costs of £15.8 million (£0.55/tablet). The NHS ED limit of one tablet/user/wk suggests that 540 000 males are being prescribed a PDE5-i at a cost of £29/y each. With approximately 30 000 GPs practising, this is equivalent to one GP providing 2.5 prescriptions/wk to overall 18 males. There was a 3x variation between the highest decile of practices (2.6 tablets/male/y) and lowest decile (0.96 tablets/male/y). The statistical model captured 14% of this variation and showed that T1DM males were the largest users, while men age <65 with T2DM were being prescribed four times as much as non-DM. Those T2DM >65 were prescribed 80% of the non-DM amount., Conclusion: There is a wide variation in the use of PDE5-is. With only 14% variance capture, other factors including wide variation in patient awareness, prescribing rules of local health providers, and recognition of the importance of male sexual health by GP prescribers might have a significant impact., (© 2020 The Authors. International Journal of Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Disparities in type 2 diabetes (T2D) care provision and clinical outcomes have been reported in the last 2 decades in the UK. Since then, a number of initiatives have attempted to address this imbalance. The aim was to evaluate contemporary data as to whether disparities exist in glycaemic control, monitoring, and prescribing in people with T2D., Methods and Findings: A T2D cohort was identified from the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre dataset: a nationally representative sample of 164 primary care practices (general practices) across England. Diabetes healthcare provision and glucose-lowering medication use between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2016 were studied. Healthcare provision included annual HbA1c, renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]), blood pressure (BP), retinopathy, and neuropathy testing. Variables potentially associated with disparity outcomes were assessed using mixed effects logistic and linear regression, adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), and nested using random effects within general practices. Ethnicity was defined using the Office for National Statistics ethnicity categories: White, Mixed, Asian, Black, and Other (including Arab people and other groups not classified elsewhere). From the primary care adult population (n = 1,238,909), we identified a cohort of 84,452 (5.29%) adults with T2D. The mean age of people with T2D in the included cohort at 31 December 2016 was 68.7 ± 12.6 years; 21,656 (43.9%) were female. The mean body mass index was 30.7 ± SD 6.4 kg/m2. The most deprived groups (IMD quintiles 1 and 2) showed poorer HbA1c than the least deprived (IMD quintile 5). People of Black ethnicity had worse HbA1c than those of White ethnicity. Asian individuals were less likely than White individuals to be prescribed insulin (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.95; p < 0.01), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58-0.79; p < 0.001), and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.31-0.44; p < 0.001). Black individuals were less likely than White individuals to be prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39-0.65; p < 0.001) and GLP-1 agonists (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.35-0.57; p < 0.001). Individuals in IMD quintile 5 were more likely than those in the other IMD quintiles to have annual testing for HbA1c, BP, eGFR, retinopathy, and neuropathy. Black individuals were less likely than White individuals to have annual testing for HbA1c (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-0.99; p = 0.04) and retinopathy (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96; p = 0.011). Asian individuals were more likely than White individuals to have monitoring for HbA1c (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20; p = 0.023) and eGFR (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.19; p = 0.048), but less likely for retinopathy (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.97; p = 0.01) and neuropathy (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.97; p = 0.01). The study is limited by the nature of being observational and defined using retrospectively collected data. Disparities in diabetes care may show regional variation, which was not part of this evaluation., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that disparity in glycaemic control, diabetes-related monitoring, and prescription of newer therapies remains a challenge in diabetes care. Both SES and ethnicity were important determinants of inequality. Disparities in glycaemic control and other areas of care may lead to higher rates of complications and adverse outcomes for some groups., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MBW has received grant funding from Sanofi (Establishing the impact of the national VTE prevention programme on post-operative VTE rates in England - OTH-2018-12016), Eli Lilly (Insights Project 2015) and speaker fees from AstraZeneca and MSD. AMcG has received research funding from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer. WH has had his academic salary funded from grant awards with Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk Limited, and AstraZeneca UK Ltd. NM has received fees for serving as a speaker, a consultant or an advisory board member for Allergan, Bristol-Myers Squibb-Astra Zeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, Lifescan, MSD, Metronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sankio, Sanofi, Roche, Servier, Takeda. SdL has held grants from Eli Lilly Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, AstraZeneca, and Novo Nordisk Limited. SC and JM were employees of Eli Lilly and both participated in critical appraisal and preparation of the manuscript.