XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Importance Changes in the prevalence of youth-onset diabetes have previously been observed. Objective To estimate changes in prevalence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in youths in the US from 2001 to 2017. Design, setting, and participants In this cross-sectional observational study, individuals younger than 20 years with physician-diagnosed diabetes were enumerated from 6 areas in the US (4 geographic areas, 1 health plan, and select American Indian reservations) for 2001, 2009, and 2017. Exposures Calendar year. Main outcomes and measures Estimated prevalence of physician-diagnosed type 1 and type 2 diabetes overall and by race and ethnicity, age, and sex. Results Among youths 19 years or younger, 4958 of 3.35 million had type 1 diabetes in 2001, 6672 of 3.46 million had type 1 diabetes in 2009, and 7759 of 3.61 million had type 1 diabetes in 2017; among those aged 10 to 19 years, 588 of 1.73 million had type 2 diabetes in 2001, 814 of 1.85 million had type 2 diabetes in 2009, and 1230 of 1.85 million had type 2 diabetes in 2017. The estimated type 1 diabetes prevalence per 1000 youths for those 19 years or younger increased significantly from 1.48 (95% CI, 1.44-1.52) in 2001 to 1.93 (95% CI, 1.88-1.98) in 2009 to 2.15 (95% CI, 2.10-2.20) in 2017, an absolute increase of 0.67 per 1000 youths (95%, CI, 0.64-0.70) and a 45.1% (95% CI, 40.0%-50.4%) relative increase over 16 years. The greatest absolute increases were observed among non-Hispanic White (0.93 per 1000 youths [95% CI, 0.88-0.98]) and non-Hispanic Black (0.89 per 1000 youths [95% CI, 0.88-0.98]) youths. The estimated type 2 diabetes prevalence per 1000 youths aged 10 to 19 years increased significantly from 0.34 (95% CI, 0.31-0.37) in 2001 to 0.46 (95% CI, 0.43-0.49) in 2009 to 0.67 (95% CI, 0.63-0.70) in 2017, an absolute increase of 0.32 per 1000 youths (95% CI, 0.30-0.35) and a 95.3% (95% CI, 77.0%-115.4%) relative increase over 16 years. The greatest absolute increases were observed among non-Hispanic Black (0.85 per 1000 youths [95% CI, 0.74-0.97]) and Hispanic (0.57 per 1000 youths [95% CI, 0.51-0.64]) youths. Conclusions and relevance In 6 areas of the US from 2001 to 2017, the estimated prevalence of diabetes among children and adolescents increased for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Trends in Prevalence of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Children and Adolescents in the US, 2001-2017.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remain as one of the most global problematic metabolic diseases with rapidly increasing prevalence and incidence. Epidemiological studies noted that T2DM patients have by two-fold increase to develop NAFLD, and vice versa. This complex and intricate association is supported and mediated by insulin resistance (IR). In this review, we discuss the NAFLD immunopathogenesis, connection with IR and T2DM, the role of screening and noninvasive tools, and mostly the impact of the current antidiabetic drugs on steatosis liver and new potential therapeutic targets.

/pdf/the-intricate-relationship-between-type-2-diabetes-mellitus-4s6cbvtvhv.pdf

The Intricate Relationship between Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), Insulin Resistance (IR), and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated loss of pancreatic beta cells leading to insulin deficiency. It is the most common form of diabetes in children, and its incidence is on the rise. This article reviews the current knowledge on the genetics of T1D. In particular, we discuss the influence of HLA and non-HLA genes on T1D risk and disease progression through the preclinical stages of the disease, and the development of genetic scores that can be applied to disease prediction. Racial/ethnic differences, challenges and future directions in the genetics of T1D are also discussed.

/pdf/genetics-of-type-1-diabetes-1knnx00bl1.pdf

Genetics of type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE Monogenic diabetes is rare but is an important diagnosis in pediatric diabetes clinics. These patients are often not identified as this relies on the recognition of key clinical features by an alert clinician. Biomarkers (islet autoantibodies and C-peptide) can assist in the exclusion of patients with type 1 diabetes and allow systematic testing that does not rely on clinical recognition. Our study aimed to establish the prevalence of monogenic diabetes in U.K. pediatric clinics using a systematic approach of biomarker screening and targeted genetic testing. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We studied 808 patients (79.5% of the eligible population) RESULTS A total of 2.5% of patients (20 of 808 patients) (95% CI 1.6–3.9%) had monogenic diabetes (8 GCK, 5 HNF1A, 4 HNF4A, 1 HNF1B, 1 ABCC8, 1 INSR). The majority (17 of 20 patients) were managed without insulin treatment. A similar proportion of the population had type 2 diabetes (3.3%, 27 of 808 patients). CONCLUSIONS This large systematic study confirms a prevalence of 2.5% of patients with monogenic diabetes who were

/pdf/systematic-population-screening-using-biomarkers-and-genetic-kjf9gydyft.pdf

Systematic Population Screening, Using Biomarkers and Genetic Testing, Identifies 2.5% of the U.K. Pediatric Diabetes Population With Monogenic Diabetes

Diagnostic criteria for all types of diabetes in children and adolescents are based on laboratory measurement of plasma glucose levels (BGL) and the presence or absence of symptoms (E). Finger prick BGL testing should not be used to diagnose diabetes (E). A marked elevation of the BGL confirms the diagnosis of diabetes, including a random plasma glucose concentration ≥11.1 mmol/L (200 mg/dl) or fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/l (≥126 mg/dl) in the presence of overt symptoms. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: Definition, epidemiology, and classification of diabetes in children and adolescents

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Pablo Aschner

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: Definition, epidemiology, and classification of diabetes in children and adolescents