Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comment
. 2015 Sep;314(12):1280-1.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.9757.

Potential Overtreatment of Older, Complex Adults With Diabetes

Affiliations
Comment

Potential Overtreatment of Older, Complex Adults With Diabetes

Elbert S Huang. JAMA. 2015 Sep.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: In older adults with multiple serious comorbidities and functional limitations, the harms of intensive glycemic control likely exceed the benefits.

OBJECTIVES: To examine glycemic control levels among older adults with diabetes mellitus by health status and to estimate the prevalence of potential overtreatment of diabetes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of the data on 1288 older adults (≥65 years) with diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 through 2010 who had a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement. All analyses incorporated complex survey design to produce nationally representative estimates.

EXPOSURES: Health status categories: very complex/poor, based on difficulty with 2 or more activities of daily living or dialysis dependence; complex/intermediate, based on difficulty with 2 or more instrumental activities of daily living or presence of 3 or more chronic conditions; and relatively healthy if none of these were present.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tight glycemic control (HbA1c level, <7%) and use of diabetes medications likely to result in hypoglycemia (insulin or sulfonylureas).

RESULTS: Of 1288 older adults with diabetes, 50.7%(95% CI, 46.6%–54.8%), representing 3.1 million (95% CI, 2.7–3.5), were relatively healthy, 28.1% (95% CI, 24.8%–31.5%), representing 1.7 million (95% CI, 1.4–2.0), had complex/intermediate health, and 21.2% (95% CI, 18.3%–24.4%), representing 1.3 million (95% CI, 1.1–1.5), had very complex/poor health. Overall, 61.5% (95% CI, 57.5%–65.3%), representing 3.8 million (95% CI, 3.4–4.2), had an HbA1c level of less than 7%; this proportion did not differ across health status categories (62.8% [95% CI, 56.9%–68.3%]) were relatively healthy, 63.0% (95% CI, 57.0%–68.6%) had complex/intermediate health, and 56.4% (95% CI, 49.7%–62.9%) had very complex/poor health (P = .26). Of the older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7%, 54.9% (95% CI, 50.4%–59.3%) were treated with either insulin or sulfonylureas; this proportion was similar across health status categories. During the 10 study years, there were no significant changes in the proportion of older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7% (P = .34), the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who had complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P = .27), or the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas despite having complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P = .65).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although the harms of intensive treatment likely exceed the benefits for older patients with complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health status, most of these adults reached tight glycemic targets between 2001 and 2010. Most of them were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, which may lead to severe hypoglycemia. Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion of older adults with diabetes were potentially overtreated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: The author has completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.

Comment on

References

    1. Rate per 100 of civilian, noninstitutionalized population with diagnosed diabetes, by age, United States, 1980–2011. [Accessed June 22, 2015]; http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figbyage.htm.
    1. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al. Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(24):2545–2559. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al. VADT Investigators. Glucose control and vascular complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(2):129–139. - PubMed
    1. Hayward RA, Reaven PD, Wiitala WL, et al. VADT Investigators. Follow-up of glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(23):2197–2206. - PubMed
    1. Huang ES, Zhang Q, Gandra N, Chin MH, Meltzer DO. The effect of comorbid illness and functional status on the expected benefits of intensive glucose control in older patients with type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(1):11–19. - PMC - PubMed