Prescribing patterns and therapeutic implications for diabetic hypertension in Bahrain

Use of non-insulin diabetes medicines after insulin initiation: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Clinical guidelines recommend that metformin be continued after insulin is initiated among patients with type 2 diabetes, yet little is known regarding how often metformin or other non-insulin diabetes medications are continued in this setting.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to characterize rates and use patterns of six classes of non-insulin diabetes medications: biguanides (metformin), sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1 receptor agonists), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4 inhibitors), and sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors (SGLT2 inhibitors), among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin. We used the 2010–2015 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data examining 72,971 patients with type 2 diabetes aged 18–65 years old who initiated insulin and had filled a prescription for a non-insulin diabetes medication in the 90 days prior to insulin initiation. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients refilling the various non-insulin diabetes medications during the first 90 days after insulin initiation. We also used time-to-event analysis to characterize the time to discontinuation of specific medication classes.

Results

Metformin was the most common non-insulin medication used prior to insulin initiation (N = 53,017, 72.7%), followed by sulfonylureas (N = 25,439, 34.9%) and DPP4 inhibitors (N = 8,540, 11.7%). More than four out of five patients (N = 65,902, 84.7%) refilled prescriptions for any non-insulin diabetes medications within 90 days after insulin initiation. Within that period, metformin remained the most common medication with the highest continuation rate of 84.6%, followed by SGLT2 inhibitors (81.9%) and TZDs (79.3%). Sulfonylureas were the least likely medications to be continued (73.6% continuation) though they remained the second most common medication class used after insulin initiation. The median time to discontinuation varied by therapeutic class from the longest time to discontinuation of 26.4 months among metformin users to the shortest (3.0 months) among SGLT2 inhibitor users.

Conclusion

While metformin was commonly continued among commercially insured adults starting insulin, rates of continuation of other non-insulin diabetes medications were also high. Further studies are needed to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of continuing insulin secretagogues and newer diabetes medications after insulin initiation.

Utilization study of antidiabetic agents in a teaching hospital of Sikkim and adherence to current standard treatment guidelines

Objective:

Diabetes has gradually emerged as one of the most serious public health problems in our country. This underlines the need for timely disease detection and decisive therapeutic intervention. This prospective cross-sectional observational study aims at analyzing the utilization pattern of antidiabetic agents in a remote North-East Indian tertiary care teaching hospital in the perspective of current standard treatment guidelines.

Materials and Methods:

Diabetic patients receiving antidiabetic medication, both as outpatients and inpatients in our hospital over a period of 12 months (May 2013–May 2014), were included in this study. The data obtained were sorted and analyzed on the basis of gender, type of therapy, and hospital setting.

Results:

A total of 310 patients were included in the study. Metformin was the single most frequently prescribed antidiabetic agent (66.8%) followed by the sulfonylureas group (37.4%). Insulin was prescribed in 23.2% of the patients. Combination antidiabetic drug therapy (65.1%) was used more frequently than monotherapy (34.8%). The use of biguanides (P < 0.0001) and sulfonylureas (P = 0.02) in combination was significant as compared to their use as monotherapy. A total of 48% of all antidiabetic combinations used, comprised metformin and sulfonylureas (n = 96). Insulin use was significantly higher as monotherapy and in inpatients (P < 0.0001). The utilization of drugs from the National List of Essential Medicines was 51.2%, while 11% of antidiabetics were prescribed by generic name.

Conclusion:

The pattern of utilization largely conforms to the current standard treatment guidelines. Increased use of generic drugs is an area with scope for improvement.

Inhibitory effect of atenolol on urinary excretion of metformin via down-regulating multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1) expression in the kidney of rats

Renal tubular secretion is an important pathway for the elimination of many clinically used drugs. Metformin, a commonly prescribed first-line antidiabetic drug, is secreted primarily by the renal tubule. Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving metformin may together be given selective β1 blockers (e.g., atenolol). Therefore, it is of great use to evaluate the effect of atenolol on metformin urinary excretion for exploring drug interactions and predicting the adverse effect of drugs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of atenolol on the pharmacokinetic of metformin and plasma lactate (LCA) level in rats, for high LCA is a serious adverse reaction of metformin after long-term metformin treatment. In this study, rats were treated with metformin alone or in combination with atenolol. Plasma, urine and tissue concentration of metformin was determined by HPLC method, while Western blotting and immunohistochemical analysis were used to evaluate the renal expression of rat organic cation transporter 2 (rOct2) and multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1). The results showed that, after 7 days drug treatment, the AUC0 → t of metformin in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 19.5% compared to that in metformin group, while the 24h cumulative urinary excretion of metformin was significantly decreased by 57.3%. In addition, atenolol treatment significantly decreased the renal expression of rMate1, but had no effect on rOct2 expression, renal blood perfusion and glomerular filtration. Moreover, plasma LCA level in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 83.3% compared to that in metformin group after 60 days drug treatment. These results indicated that atenolol can inhibit urinary excretion of metformin via decreasing renal rMate1 expression, and long-term atenolol and metformin co-administration may induce potential lactic acidosis. Our results, for the first time, provided an important experimental evidence that rMate1 is the target of transporter-mediated drug interactions concerning metformin and atenolol.

Trends in the use of antihypertensive drugs by outpatients with diabetes in Taiwan, 1997-2003

PURPOSE

To analyze trends in AHD-use by diabetic outpatients in Taiwan over a 7-year period (1997-2003) and to see whether the trends are consistent with clinical trial outcomes and published guidelines.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was implemented using National Health Insurance Research Database between January 1997 and December 2003. Adult outpatients who had diagnoses of diabetes and hypertension and who had concurrent antidiabetic and antihypertensive drug claim were identified. The prescribing trends were described in terms of the prescribing rates and patterns of AHDs in each study year.

RESULTS

Of the AHDs, CCBs were the most widely prescribed class throughout the study period but the prescribing rates declined considerably over the study period. A significant downward trend was also observed for beta-blockers and other classes. Drugs acting on the RAS were the only one class showing a significant increase in prescribing rates with time. The prescribing patterns for monotherapy regimen decreased over time while those for two-, three-, and four or more drug regimens increased over time. Monotherapies maintained with CCBs, beta-blockers, diuretics, and other classes steadily declined but those maintained with drugs acting on the RAS markedly increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of drugs acting on the RAS showed a marked increasing trend over the course of the study. Physicians' prescribing patterns for AHD are increasingly involving multi-drug regimens. These findings may imply that management of hypertension in patients with diabetes had a positive trend toward to new clinical trial outcomes and guideline's recommendation.

The impact of new insights and revised practice guidelines on prescribing drugs in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of new insights and revised guidelines on initial and follow-up treatment with antihyperglycaemic drugs over the period 1998-2003.

METHODS

The InterAction Database (IADB), which contains pharmacy dispensing data from 53 community pharmacies in the Northern and Eastern part of the Netherlands, was used in this study. Prevalence and incidence rates of oral antihyperglycaemic drug use were calculated for each year. Follow-up treatment was compared for two cohorts of initial users of oral antihyperglycaemic drugs, starting treatment either 1 year before or 1 year after guideline revision.

RESULTS

The prevalence and incidence rate of oral antihyperglycaemic drug use increased over the study period from 1.8% to 2.4% (P < 0.001) and 0.3% to 0.4% (P = 0.04). The proportion of metformin as initial treatment increased rapidly in the observation period from 14% to 50% (P < 0.001). Initial users of metformin in 2000 received additional treatment with a sulphonylurea in the follow-up period less often compared with those who started metformin in 1998 (46%vs. 60%, P < 0.004). In contrast, initial users of sulphonylurea in 2000 received additional treatment with metformin more often compared with those who started a sulphonylurea in 1998 (42%vs. 36%, P < 0.008). The new drugs, thiazolidinediones and meglitinides, were seldom used as initial treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

New insights and the revision of the practice guideline were followed by a significant increase in both initial and follow-up treatment with metformin among patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Using a pharmacoepidemiological approach to estimate diabetes type 2 prevalence in Portugal

PURPOSE

To estimate the prevalence of drug-treated diabetes type 2 in Portugal using drug consumption data and accounting for the proportion of patients treated with combinations of oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHAs).

METHODS

The prevalence of diabetes treated by OHAs was calculated on the basis of: IMS-Health data for Portugal (2003) and two measures of daily drug intake-defined daily dose (DDD) and prescribed daily dose (PDD), after correcting for the proportion of patients treated with two or more OHAs. The PDD and proportion of patients in combination therapies have been obtained in a descriptive, cross-sectional national survey, conducted in 2003, by inquiry of 1,046 type 2 diabetics country wide distributed.

RESULTS

Drug use study: We have studied 1046 type 2 diabetics (539 women, 501 men, 6 sex unknown), with a mean age of 64.5 (SD=11) years. OHAs were prescribed as monotherapy in 46.8% (489/1,046) of the patients and the remaining 557 (53.2%) received from 2 to 4 OHAs concomitantly.Diabetes prevalence: Using DDD as the mean daily intake consumption unit, the prevalence of drug-treated type 2 diabetes was 4.15%, which dropped to 2.52% when the proportion of OHAs associations was taken into account. Using PDD these values were 4.48% and 2.72%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Since a high proportion of patients are treated with combination of OHAs in clinical practice, it is imperative to account for that confounder in order to improve the accuracy of estimate from drug consumption data. The use of this methodology provided a slight under-estimation of diabetes prevalence, compared with the National Health Authorities values (3%-5%). Nevertheless we consider this as an efficient tool to estimate drug-treated diabetes prevalence that should be implemented in a regular way for longitudinal observations, in order to generate signals.

Rational pharmacotherapy in the diabetic hypertension: analysis-prescribing patterns in a general hospital in Taiwan

OBJECTIVES

To examine prescribing at a 2800-bed hospital, also providing ambulatory services for 9000 visits per day, with a view to assessing the extent to which it followed international guidelines for treating diabetic hypertension.

METHOD

Patients receiving antidiabetic and antihypertensive drugs concomitantly during the 4-week study period were included.

RESULT

Of the 5015 eligible patients, most received combination antidiabetic therapy. Oral antidiabetic agents used alone or in combination included (in descending order) metformin, glibenclamide, gliclazide, glipizide, glimepiride and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors. Gliclazide accounted for most of the oral antidiabetic drug expenditure. Sulfonylurea plus metformin was the most popular regimen. Prescriptions for long-acting sulfonylureas did not differ between elderly and younger patients. For blood pressure control, calcium-channel blockers were most commonly used alone and overall, although current guidelines suggest that they should be second-line treatments. Inappropriate use of immediate-release nifedipine was noted. The combination, atenolol >100 mg/day and hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg/day (or an equivalent) were extensively used. Among 54.7% patients treated with combination antihypertensives, calcium-channel blockers and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor were most commonly used.

CONCLUSION

Most diabetic hypertensive patients were treated with combination therapy for glucose and blood pressure control. Prescriptions for antihypertensive drugs often differed from current guidelines, especially in the choice of agents and their combinations.

Evaluating the treatment of hypertension in diabetes mellitus: a need for better control?

OBJECTIVES

To determine how well and to what extent blood pressure (BP) is controlled in diabetic hypertensive patients treated by primary care doctors, and to evaluate drug therapy in the backdrop of risk factors and laboratory findings.

METHODS

A therapeutic audit of the medical records of diabetic hypertensives from nine primary care health centres in Bahrain.

RESULTS

In 266 diabetic hypertensives (82 males and 184 females), the recommended target BP < 130/< 85 mmHg (WHO/ISH guidelines, 1999) was achieved in 20 (9.8%) with a BP of 119 +/- 4/76 +/- 5 mmHg. Among those who did not achieve target BP, 70 (34.5%) lacked systolic BP control (BP = 153 +/- 17/79 +/- 3 mmHg), four (2%) lacked diastolic BP control (BP = 123 +/- 3/86 +/- 3 mmHg) and 109 (53.7%) lacked both systolic and diastolic BP control (BP = 158 +/- 20/94 +/- 7 mmHg). The mean age of the group achieving target BP was significantly lower than the group which lacked systolic BP control (51.6 +/- 9 vs. 63.5 +/- 9 years; P < 0.0001). While there were no significant differences in fasting blood glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin, triglycerides, urea, creatinine, uric acid and serum electrolytes between the group achieving target BP vs. groups without target BP, a significant difference in total cholesterol was seen.

PATIENTS

with ischaemic heart disease and/or isolated systolic hypertension did not achieve the target BP. Antihypertensive monotherapy was prescribed in 145 (54.5%) patients, whereas two- and three-drug combinations were prescribed in 32.3 and 8.2% of patients, respectively. As monotherapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors were the most frequently prescribed drugs followed by beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and diuretics. As two-drug combinations, an ACE inhibitor with a beta-blocker/diuretic and a beta-blocker with a CCB/diuretic were usually prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the WHO/ISH 1999 guidelines, approximately one out of 10 diabetic hypertensives achieved target BP control. In many instances, the drug therapy prescribed was inappropriate considering the comorbidity in patients and their laboratory findings. Improved BP control is needed in treating high-risk groups such as patients with diabetes mellitus, and efforts should be made to improve the treatment of hypertension in the primary care setting.

Treatment of Hypertension in Bahrain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the adequacy of blood pressure (BP) control and therapeutic appropriateness of antihypertensive drug(s) prescribed, taking into consideration laboratory parameters and the presence of comorbidities, in hypertensive patients.

METHODS

Therapeutic audit of medical records of hypertensive patients from 9 primary care health centers in Bahrain using World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension guidelines criteria.

RESULTS

The recommended target BP <140/<90 mmHg was achieved in 37 (16.5%) patients with a mean BP of 126 +/- 6 / 80 +/- 5 mmHg. Groups with inadequate BP control were 15 (6.7%) with normal systolic BP (SBP) and high diastolic BP (DBP), 59 (26.3%) with high SBP and normal DBP, and 113 (50.4%) with high SBP and high DBP. Pulse pressure of the controlled group was 46.3 +/- 5.9, whereas pulse pressures of the inadequately controlled groups with BP cutoffs <140/> or =90, > or =140/<90, and > or =140/> or =90 mmHg were 37.4 +/- 6.1, 72.7 +/- 13.5, and 59.7 +/- 13.6 mmHg, respectively. Of the 281 treated hypertensive patients, 56.6% were on monotherapy; BP of patients on combination therapy versus monotherapy did not differ. The choice of antihypertensives in relation to comorbidities and laboratory findings revealed that many hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia were on beta-blockers and diuretics, 39.3% of patients with ischemic heart disease were on beta-blockers, approximately 20% of patients with hyperuricemia were on diuretics, and 27.6% and 10.4% of patients with isolated systolic hypertension were on diuretics and calcium-channel blockers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BP control was achieved in 1 of 6 treated patients. In several instances, metabolic abnormalities and comorbidities were apparently not considered while prescribing antihypertensives. A rational drug therapy approach is needed in treating hypertension to achieve better control rates.

Prescribing pattern of antihypertensive drugs by family physicians and general practitioners in the primary care setting in Bahrain

The aim was to determine whether there are differences among family physicians (FPs) and general practitioners (GPs) in terms of their preference for different classes of antihypertensives, either alone or in combinations, in uncomplicated cases of hypertension and to determine the extent of adherence to WHO/ISH guidelines. We have analysed prescribing of antihypertensives by qualified family physicians (FPs) (n=77) and compared this with that of general practitioners (GPs) (n =41) by auditing 1791 prescriptions of FPs and 914 prescriptions of GPs, issued to patients with uncomplicated hypertension, at 15 out of 20 health centres in Bahrain. The choice of antihypertensive(s) by FPs and GPs was comparable and conformed with the WHO/ISH guidelines as regards preference for: (i) beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) as monotherapy; (ii) two-drug combinations (diuretic-beta-blocker; beta-blocker-CCB); (iii) three-drug combinations (diuretic-beta-blocker-CCB; diuretic-beta-blocker-ACE inhibitor; beta-blocker- ACE inhibitor-CCBs), and (iv) choice of drug used for the elderly either alone (CCBs) or as combinations (diuretic-beta-blocker; beta-blocker-CCB and diuretic-beta-blocker-ACE inhibitor; diuretic-beta-blocker-CCB). In several instances prescribing by both FPs and GPs was not in accordance with the WHO/ISH guidelines: reluctance to prescribe diuretics as monotherapy; use of suboptimal combinations (beta-blocker-ACE inhibitor); and extensive use of beta-blockers and irrational use of immediate-release nifedipine in elderly. A statistically significant prescribing difference between FPs and GPs was evident in the following: beta-blockers as monotherapy (P =0.01), diuretic-CCB (P=0.046), and diuretic-CCB-methyldopa (P=0.01) combination, and immediate-release nifedipine monotherapy in the elderly (P=0.027), were prescribed more often by the GPs. However, beta-blocker-ACE inhibitor-CCB combination was more often prescribed by FPs (P=0.046). Remarkable differences in prescribing pattern of antihypertensives between the FPs and GPs were evident. Although the general pattern supported a superior prescribing profile of the FPs as expected, there is a need for improved prescribing by both GPs and FPs. Educational programmes, both graduate and residency training, and continuing professional education, should specifically address these deficiencies in order to assure quality primary health care.

Family physicians' and general practitioners' approaches to drug management of diabetic hypertension in primary care

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the pharmacotherapeutic approaches to diabetic hypertension of family physicians (FPs) and general practitioners (GPs).

METHODS

A retrospective prescription-based study was conducted in 15 out of a total of 20 health centres, involving 115 primary care physicians--77 FPs and 38 GPs, representing 74% of the primary care physicians of Bahrain. Prescriptions were collected during May and June 2000 to comprise a study population of 1266 diabetic-hypertensive patients.

RESULTS

As monotherapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (37.9%) and beta-blockers (38.3%) were the most commonly prescribed classes of antihypertensives by FPs and GPs, respectively. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) were ranked third by both categories of physicians. For two-drug combinations, a beta-blocker and an ACE inhibitor was the combination of choice for both physician categories. Patients managed by the FPs were more likely to receive a beta-blocker-CCB combination (17.4 vs. 14.9%) or a diuretic-ACE inhibitor combination (16.7 vs. 11.4%) and less likely to receive a beta-blocker-diuretic combination (11.8 vs. 16.7%) than those managed by the GPs. The proportion of patients receiving antihypertensive combinations was 40.6 and 38.5% for FPs and GPs, respectively. While the GPs prescribed CCB as a monotherapy to the elderly most often, the FPs choice was a beta-blocker. Diuretics were less preferred by both FPs and GPs. Beta-blocker-ACE inhibitor was again the most preferred combination of both FPs and GPs. FPs prescribed CCB-beta-blocker combinations more often than GPs (P = 0.01), whereas CCB-ACE inhibitor combinations were less preferred (P = 0.09). A trend towards excessive use of short-acting nifedipine as monotherapy for elderly patients, both by FPs and by GPs, was noticed. Glibenclamide, alone or in combination with metformin, was the foremost antidiabetic drug prescribed by FPs and GPs. Middle-aged (45-64 years) patients seen by GPs were more likely to receive glibenclamide than those treated by FPs (P = 0.001) and less likely to receive gliclazide (P = 0.01). Combinations of a beta-blocker with either glibenclamide or insulin were prescribed considerably more often by GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the same practice setting, a substantial difference was observed between FPs and GPs in terms of preference for different classes of drugs in the management of diabetic hypertension. The compliance of both FPs and GPs was suboptimal; overall, the compliance of the FPs was closer to the recommended guidelines, however. Educational programmes should specifically address these inadequacies in order to improve the quality of health care.