Access to POEMs and Essential Evidence Plus will no longer be included in CMA membership as of Dec. 1, 2023.
Clinical Question
How tight should glycemic control be for adults with type 2 diabetes?
Bottom line
The American College of Physicians suggests aiming for a hemoglobin A1c level between 7% and 8% for most adults with type 2 diabetes, but they add a caveat that the patient should be the one who makes that decision. The authors weakly recommend backing off treatment for patients with an A1c level of less than 6.5% (cue Moro reflex for those in the lower-is-better camp) and suggest forgoing A1c goals and treating to minimize symptoms in patients 80 years or older and those with a life expectancy of fewer than 10 years (cue spit take from same audience). 5
Reference
Study design: Practice guideline
Funding: Self-funded or unfunded
Setting: Various (guideline)
Synopsis
These authors followed good practices for developing guidelines. They focused on the benefits and harms of treatment and based their recommendations on outcomes from studies of outpatient adults with type 2 diabetes. They obtained the research after a systematic review of the available literature, graded the evidence, and included both a methodologist and a patient representative unencumbered by relationships with pharma. Voting members did not have financial conflicts of interest. As with recent changes to recommendations from the American Diabetes Association, they suggest basing glycemic goals on patient wishes, not hard-and-fast targets, following a discussion of benefits and harms. For most patients, an A1c level between 7% and 8% is suitable. In a direct smackdown to recommendations from US endocrinologist societies (Endocr Pract 2018;24(1):91-120), they suggest backing off treatment if a patient's A1c level is below 6.5%, to avoid hypoglycemic symptoms. With a nod toward other preventions aimed at baseline risk, they suggest tossing glycemic targets and treating to minimize symptoms related to hyperglycemia in patients 80 years or older or with other chronic diseases and/or a life expectancy of fewer than 10 years.
Reviewer
Allen F. Shaughnessy, PharmD, MMedEd
Professor of Family Medicine
Tufts University
Boston, MA
Comments
Finally..
some common sense. Now can the same authors turn their attention to lipid guidelines for primary prevention??
It is refreshing that the authors recommend talking with the patient about benefits and harms of treatment.
another strike against the present gp model of algorithmic medicine
It's nice the evidence and guideline organizations are coming around to my goals for treatment targets
good poem
Just because we can achieve low hemoglobin A1C, does not mean that we should do it, especially if there is significant increased risk of harm to the patient or lack of patient benefit re length of life.
Hgb a1c target
consider taking the patient's age and moving the decimal point to the left to arrive at an ideal Hgb a1c level for that individual.
Another reason for treating the patient and not the disease. Some of my diabetics need the readings to be between 7 and 8 for Hb1Ac to manage their diabetes suitably.
Tailor to the patient, I say.
Can I say how much I enjoyed the author's side comments? Info POEMS are often dry but then there are gems like this one!
Clinical Medicine is alive!!
Common sense approach.