Montori, Victor M

OBJECTIVE The negative results of two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have challenged current guideline recommendations for using aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes. We therefore sought to determine if the effect of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events and mortality differs between patients with and without diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus since their inceptions until November 2008 for RCTs of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events. Blinded pairs of reviewers evaluated studies and extracted data. Random-effects meta-analysis and Bayesian logistic regression were used to estimate the ratios of relative risks (RRs) of outcomes of interest among patients with and without diabetes. A 95% CI that crosses 1.00 indicates that the effect of aspirin does not differ between patients with and without diabetes. RESULTS Nine RCTs with moderate to high methodological quality contributed data to the analyses. The ratios of RRs comparing the benefit of aspirin among patients with diabetes compared with patients without diabetes for mortality, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke were 1.12 (95% CI 0.92–1.35), 1.19 (0.82–1.17), and 0.70 (0.25–1.97), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Whereas estimates of benefit among patients with diabetes remain imprecise, our analysis suggests that the relative benefit of aspirin is similar in patients with and without diabetes.

Background. Statin Choice is a decision aid about taking statins. The optimal mode of delivering Statin Choice (or any other decision aid) in clinical practice is unknown. Methods. To investigate the effect of mode of delivery on decision aid efficacy, the authors further explored the results of a concealed 2 × 2 factorial clustered randomized trial enrolling 21 endocrinologists and 98 diabetes patients and randomizing them to 1) receive either the decision aid or pamphlet about cholesterol, and 2) have these delivered either during the office visit (by the clinician) or before the visit (by a researcher). We estimated between-group differences and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for acceptability of information delivery (1—7), knowledge about statins and coronary risk (0—9), and decisional conflict about statin use (0—100) assessed immediately after the visit. Follow-up was 99%. Results. The relative efficacy of the decision aid v. pamphlet interacted with the mode of delivery. Compared with the pamphlet, patients whose clinicians delivered the decision aid during the office visit showed significant improvements in knowledge (difference of 1.6 of 9 questions, CI 0.3, 2.8) and nonsignificant trends toward finding the decision aid more acceptable (odds ratio 3.1, CI 0.9, 11.2) and having less decisional conflict (difference of 7 of 100 points, CI - 4, 18) than when a researcher delivered the decision aid just before the office visit. Conclusions. Delivery of decision aids by clinicians during the visit improves knowledge and shows a trend toward better acceptability and less decisional conflict.

Abstract Context: Hypoglycemia limits the efficacy of intensive insulin therapy. The extent to which continuous insulin infusion (CSII) overcomes this limitation is unclear. Objective: The aim was to summarize evidence on the effect of CSII and multiple daily injections (MDIs) on glycemic control and hypoglycemia. Data Sources: We searched electronic databases between 2002 and March 2008. Study Selection: We selected published randomized trials of CSII vs. MDI. Data Extraction: Reviewers working in duplicate and independently extracted study characteristics and quality and differences in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and hypoglycemic events. Data Synthesis: We found 15 eligible randomized trials of moderate quality, with elevated baseline and end-of-study HbA1c levels. Patients with type 1 diabetes using CSII had slightly lower HbA1c [random-effects weighted mean difference, −0.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI), −0.3, −0.1, compared with MDI], with no significant difference in severe (pooled odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.23, 1.00) or nocturnal hypoglycemia (pooled odds ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.33, 2.03). Adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes enrolled in crossover trials had nonsignificantly fewer minor hypoglycemia episodes per patient per week (−0.08; 95% CI, −0.21, 0.06) with CSII than MDI; children enrolled in parallel trials had significantly more episodes (0.68; 95% CI, 0.16, 1.20; Pinteraction = 0.03). Outcomes were not different in patients with type 2 diabetes. Conclusions: Contemporary evidence indicates that compared to MDI, CSII slightly reduced HbA1c in adults with type 1 diabetes, with unclear impact on hypoglycemia. In type 2 diabetes, CSII and MDI had similar outcomes. The effect in patients with hypoglycemia unawareness or recurrent severe hypoglycemia remains unclear because of lack of data.

Objective: Our objective was to formulate practice guidelines for the treatment and prevention of pediatric obesity.Conclusions: We recommend defining overweight as body mass index (BMI) in at least the 85th percentile but < the 95th percentile and obesity as BMI in at least the 95th percentile against routine endocrine studies unless the height velocity is attenuated or inappropriate for the family background or stage of puberty; referring patients to a geneticist if there is evidence of a genetic syndrome; evaluating for obesity-associated comorbidities in children with BMI in at least the 85th percentile; and prescribing and supporting intensive lifestyle (dietary, physical activity, and behavioral) modification as the prerequisite for any treatment. We suggest that pharmacotherapy (in combination with lifestyle modification) be considered in: 1) obese children only after failure of a formal program of intensive lifestyle modification; and 2) overweight children only if severe comorbidities persist despite intensive lifestyle modification, particularly in children with a strong family history of type 2 diabetes or premature cardiovascular disease. Pharmacotherapy should be provided only by clinicians who are experienced in the use of antiobesity agents and aware of the potential for adverse reactions. We suggest bariatric surgery for adolescents with BMI above 50 kg/m2, or BMI above 40 kg/m2 with severe comorbidities in whom lifestyle modifications and/or pharmacotherapy have failed. Candidates for surgery and their families must be psychologically stable and capable of adhering to lifestyle modifications. Access to experienced surgeons and sophisticated multidisciplinary teams who assess the benefits and risks of surgery is obligatory. We emphasize the prevention of obesity by recommending breast-feeding of infants for at least 6 months and advocating that schools provide for 60 min of moderate to vigorous daily exercise in all grades. We suggest that clinicians educate children and parents through anticipatory guidance about healthy dietary and activity habits, and we advocate for restricting the availability of unhealthy food choices in schools, policies to ban advertising unhealthy food choices to children, and community redesign to maximize opportunities for safe walking and bike riding to school, athletic activities, and neighborhood shopping.