-
Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy 2017Physical exercise has been used to mitigate the metabolic effects of diabetes mellitus. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Physical exercise has been used to mitigate the metabolic effects of diabetes mellitus.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effect of resistance exercise when compared to aerobic exercise without insulin therapy on metabolic and clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS
Papers were searched on the databases MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, LILACS, and SCIELO, without language or date of publication limits. Clinical trials that compared resistance exercise to aerobic exercise in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus who did not use insulin therapy were included. The quality of evidence and risk of bias were assessed using the GRADE system and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, respectively. Meta-analysis was also used, whenever possible. Two reviewers extracted the data independently. Eight eligible articles were included in this study, with a total of 336 individuals, with a mean age of 48-58 years. The protocols of aerobic and resistance exercise varied in duration from eight to 22 weeks, 30-60min/day, three to five times/week.
RESULTS
Overall the available evidence came from a very low quality of evidence and there was an increase in Maximal oxygen consumption (mean difference: -2.86; 95% CI: -3.90 to -1.81; random effect) for the resistance exercise and no difference was found in Glycated hemoglobin, Body mass index, High-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total cholesterol.
CONCLUSIONS
Resistance exercise appears to be more effective in promoting an increase in Maximal oxygen consumption in protocols longer than 12 weeks and there is no difference in the control of glycemic and lipid levels between the two types of exercise.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Insulin; Oxygen Consumption; Resistance Training
PubMed: 28728958
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.06.004 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2021We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to evaluate the association between the presence of sarcopenia and HbA1c, prediabetes, diabetes and diabetic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to evaluate the association between the presence of sarcopenia and HbA1c, prediabetes, diabetes and diabetic complications.
METHOD
The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to May 2021. We included full-text English language articles that reported the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with and without diabetes. Quality assessment was performed according to the Newcastle- Ottawa scale for observational studies.
RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Three studies showed that high HbA1c levels lead to loss of muscle mass, and one study involving prediabetes showed that people with prediabetes had lower muscle mass, strength, and performance than non-diabetic population. Seven studies showed that people with diabetes had a higher risk of sarcopenia than those without diabetes (combined OR: 2.09, 95% CI:1.62-2.70). The remaining five studies suggested that diabetic complications increased the risk of sarcopenia (combined OR: 2.09,95% CI:1.62-2.70).
CONCLUSION
High HbA1c levels, prediabetes, diabetes and diabetes complications were associated with an increased risk of sarcopenia. Therapeutic strategies addressed to avoid the conversion of IGT to diabetes and to optimize glycemic control are warranted to prevent or arrest sarcopenia in the diabetic population.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Risk Factors; Sarcopenia
PubMed: 35002965
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.782391 -
Nutrition, Metabolism, and... Nov 2018The strength of the association between diabetes and risk of heart failure has differed between previous studies and the available studies have not been summarized in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIM
The strength of the association between diabetes and risk of heart failure has differed between previous studies and the available studies have not been summarized in a meta-analysis. We therefore quantified the association between diabetes and blood glucose and heart failure in a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS AND RESULTS
PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to May 3rd 2018. Prospective studies on diabetes mellitus or blood glucose and heart failure risk were included. A random effects model was used to calculate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Seventy seven studies were included. Among the population-based prospective studies, the summary RR for individuals with diabetes vs. no diabetes was 2.06 (95% CIs: 1.73-2.46, I = 99.8%, n = 30 studies, 401495 cases, 21416780 participants). The summary RR was 1.23 (95% CI: 1.15-1.32, I = 78.2%, n = 10, 5344 cases, 91758 participants) per 20 mg/dl increase in blood glucose and there was evidence of a J-shaped association with nadir around 90 mg/dl and increased risk even within the pre-diabetic blood glucose range. Among the patient-based studies the summary RR was 1.69 (95% CI: 1.57-1.81, I = 85.5%, p<0.0001) for diabetes vs. no diabetes (n = 41, 100284 cases and >613925 participants) and 1.25 (95% CI: 0.89-1.75, I = 95.6%, p<0.0001) per 20 mg/dl increase in blood glucose (1016 cases, 34309 participants, n = 2). In the analyses of diabetes and heart failure there was low or no heterogeneity among the population-based studies that adjusted for alcohol intake and physical activity and among the patient-based studies there was no heterogeneity among studies with ≥10 years follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest that individuals with diabetes are at an increased risk of developing heart failure and there is evidence of increased risk even within the pre-diabetic range of blood glucose.
Topics: Biomarkers; Blood Glucose; Diabetes Mellitus; Heart Failure; Humans; Prognosis; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 30318112
DOI: 10.1016/j.numecd.2018.07.005 -
Journal of the American Heart... Sep 2016The relationships between physical activity (PA) and both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have predominantly been estimated using... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The relationships between physical activity (PA) and both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have predominantly been estimated using categorical measures of PA, masking the shape of the dose-response relationship. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, for the very first time we are able to derive a single continuous PA metric to compare the association between PA and CVD/T2DM, both before and after adjustment for a measure of body weight.
METHODS AND RESULTS
The search was applied to MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases for all studies published from January 1981 to March 2014. A total of 36 studies (3 439 874 participants and 179 393 events, during an average follow-up period of 12.3 years) were included in the analysis (33 pertaining to CVD and 3 to T2DM). An increase from being inactive to achieving recommended PA levels (150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity per week) was associated with lower risk of CVD mortality by 23%, CVD incidence by 17%, and T2DM incidence by 26% (relative risk [RR], 0.77 [0.71-0.84]), (RR, 0.83 [0.77-0.89]), and (RR, 0.74 [0.72-0.77]), respectively, after adjustment for body weight.
CONCLUSIONS
By using a single continuous metric for PA levels, we were able to make a comparison of the effect of PA on CVD incidence and mortality including myocardial infarct (MI), stroke, and heart failure, as well as T2DM. Effect sizes were generally similar for CVD and T2DM, and suggested that the greatest gain in health is associated with moving from inactivity to small amounts of PA.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Angiopathies; Exercise; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27628572
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002495 -
BMJ Open Nov 2017Explore the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions and metformin in reducing subsequent incidence of type 2 diabetes, both alone and in combination with a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Explore the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions and metformin in reducing subsequent incidence of type 2 diabetes, both alone and in combination with a screening programme to identify high-risk individuals.
DESIGN
Systematic review of economic evaluations.
DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Database searches (Embase, Medline, PreMedline, NHS EED) and citation tracking identified economic evaluations of lifestyle interventions or metformin alone or in combination with screening programmes in people at high risk of developing diabetes. The International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research's Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility of Modelling Studies for Informing Healthcare Decision Making was used to assess study quality.
RESULTS
27 studies were included; all had evaluated lifestyle interventions and 12 also evaluated metformin. Primary studies exhibited considerable heterogeneity in definitions of pre-diabetes and intensity and duration of lifestyle programmes. Lifestyle programmes and metformin appeared to be cost effective in preventing diabetes in high-risk individuals (median incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £7490/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and £8428/QALY, respectively) but economic estimates varied widely between studies. Intervention-only programmes were in general more cost effective than programmes that also included a screening component. The longer the period evaluated, the more cost-effective interventions appeared. In the few studies that evaluated other economic considerations, budget impact of prevention programmes was moderate (0.13%-0.2% of total healthcare budget), financial payoffs were delayed (by 9-14 years) and impact on incident cases of diabetes was limited (0.1%-1.6% reduction). There was insufficient evidence to answer the question of (1) whether lifestyle programmes are more cost effective than metformin or (2) whether low-intensity lifestyle interventions are more cost effective than the more intensive lifestyle programmes that were tested in trials.
CONCLUSIONS
The economics of preventing diabetes are complex. There is some evidence that diabetes prevention programmes are cost effective, but the evidence base to date provides few clear answers regarding design of prevention programmes because of differences in denominator populations, definitions, interventions and modelling assumptions.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Life Style; Metformin; Prediabetic State; Preventive Health Services; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29146638
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017184 -
Revista Medica de Chile Nov 2019Background Affordable interventions to improve metabolic control of Type 2-Diabetes Mellitus are increasingly necessary. Aim To review systematically the existing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Background Affordable interventions to improve metabolic control of Type 2-Diabetes Mellitus are increasingly necessary. Aim To review systematically the existing literature on the effects of psychological interventions on Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus compensation. Material and Methods We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of psychological interventions implemented for Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus patients. Research included the following electronic databases: PubMed, Bireme, Web of Science, SciELO, Embase, EBSCOhost, SCOPUS, Psychology Database. Results Most studies showed a decrease in the level of glycated hemoglobin after interventions, which applied different initiatives complementary to standard medical treatment. Mainly, these interventions encompassed training for self-monitoring and control of diabetes based on cognitive behavioral psychology, counseling, self-assessment and physical-spiritual work based on transpersonal psychology. Conclusions Psychological tools could be an adjunct to the standard medical treatment for patients with Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus, reducing glycated hemoglobin levels and improving self-regulation, disease awareness and adherence from the self-efficacy perception perspective.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Psychotherapy
PubMed: 32186603
DOI: 10.4067/S0034-98872019001101423 -
Diabetes Care Apr 2020Identifying patients at high risk of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) helps improve clinical outcome. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Identifying patients at high risk of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) helps improve clinical outcome.
PURPOSE
To establish a model for predicting DKD.
DATA SOURCES
The derivation cohort was from a meta-analysis. The validation cohort was from a Chinese cohort.
STUDY SELECTION
Cohort studies that reported risk factors of DKD with their corresponding risk ratios (RRs) in patients with type 2 diabetes were selected. All patients had estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) <30 mg/g at baseline.
DATA EXTRACTION
Risk factors and their corresponding RRs were extracted. Only risk factors with statistical significance were included in our DKD risk prediction model.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Twenty cohorts including 41,271 patients with type 2 diabetes were included in our meta-analysis. Age, BMI, smoking, diabetic retinopathy, hemoglobin A, systolic blood pressure, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, UACR, and eGFR were statistically significant. All these risk factors were included in the model except eGFR because of the significant heterogeneity among studies. All risk factors were scored according to their weightings, and the highest score was 37.0. The model was validated in an external cohort with a median follow-up of 2.9 years. A cutoff value of 16 was selected with a sensitivity of 0.847 and a specificity of 0.677.
LIMITATIONS
There was huge heterogeneity among studies involving eGFR. More evidence is needed to power it as a risk factor of DKD.
CONCLUSIONS
The DKD risk prediction model consisting of nine risk factors established in this study is a simple tool for detecting patients at high risk of DKD.
Topics: Adult; Age of Onset; Aged; Blood Pressure; Cohort Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diabetic Retinopathy; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Kidney Function Tests; Male; Middle Aged; Models, Statistical; Prognosis; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 32198286
DOI: 10.2337/dc19-1897 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2023Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasing globally. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness in adults with T2D; however, the global burden of DR in pediatric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasing globally. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness in adults with T2D; however, the global burden of DR in pediatric T2D is unknown. This knowledge can inform retinopathy screening and treatments to preserve vision in this population.
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the global prevalence of DR in pediatric T2D.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, the Web of Science, and the gray literature (ie, literature containing information that is not available through traditional publishing and distribution channels) were searched for relevant records from the date of database inception to April 4, 2021, with updated searches conducted on May 17, 2022. Searches were limited to human studies. No language restrictions were applied. Search terms included diabetic retinopathy; diabetes mellitus, type 2; prevalence studies; and child, adolescent, teenage, youth, and pediatric.
STUDY SELECTION
Three teams, each with 2 reviewers, independently screened for observational studies with 10 or more participants that reported the prevalence of DR. Among 1989 screened articles, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria for the pooled analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Two independent reviewers performed the risk of bias and level of evidence analyses. The results were pooled using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was reported using χ2 and I2 statistics.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main outcome was the estimated pooled global prevalence of DR in pediatric T2D. Other outcomes included DR severity and current DR assessment methods. The association of diabetes duration, sex, race, age, and obesity with DR prevalence was also assessed.
RESULTS
Among the 27 studies included in the pooled analysis (5924 unique patients; age range at T2D diagnosis, 6.5-21.0 years), the global prevalence of DR in pediatric T2D was 6.99% (95% CI, 3.75%-11.00%; I2 = 95%; 615 patients). Fundoscopy was less sensitive than 7-field stereoscopic fundus photography in detecting retinopathy (0.47% [95% CI, 0%-3.30%; I2 = 0%] vs 13.55% [95% CI, 5.43%-24.29%; I2 = 92%]). The prevalence of DR increased over time and was 1.11% (95% CI, 0.04%-3.06%; I2 = 5%) at less than 2.5 years after T2D diagnosis, 9.04% (95% CI, 2.24%-19.55%; I2 = 88%) at 2.5 to 5.0 years after T2D diagnosis, and 28.14% (95% CI, 12.84%-46.45%; I2 = 96%) at more than 5 years after T2D diagnosis. The prevalence of DR increased with age, and no differences were noted based on sex, race, or obesity. Heterogeneity was high among studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this study, DR prevalence in pediatric T2D increased significantly at more than 5 years after diagnosis. These findings suggest that retinal microvasculature is an early target of T2D in children and adolescents, and annual screening with fundus photography beginning at diagnosis offers the best assessment method for early detection of DR in pediatric patients.
Topics: Adult; Adolescent; Humans; Child; Child, Preschool; Diabetic Retinopathy; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Prevalence; Retina; Obesity; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36930156
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.1887 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Jan 2019Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for cataract development. With T2D prevalence increasing, the burden of cataract-associated vision loss will also increase. We...
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for cataract development. With T2D prevalence increasing, the burden of cataract-associated vision loss will also increase. We aimed to characterise cataract diabetes-specific risk factors to assist prevention and management strategies. As part of a systematic review, two investigators independently searched online electronic databases according to a predetermined protocol for relevant published data to end-March 2018. Studies were included if they were longitudinal with ≥100 participants, diabetes was defined, a description of cataract assessment was provided, data were from humans, and the reports were in English. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and GRADE. Of 5255 publications identified, 19 from 13 study populations were included. The overall risk of bias was low. There was between-study variability. Age and glycaemic control were consistently associated with cataract development in T2D, but blood pressure, diabetes duration, sex, and aspirin use were not. Serum lipids and smoking remain possible risk factors, but available data are inconclusive. Glycaemia is the only consistent modifiable risk factor amongst a range of candidate variables. Due to the lack of consistency of the available evidence, and since mortality associated with T2D is declining with the likelihood of increased cataract-associated vision loss, additional well-conducted longitudinal studies are needed to identify modifiable risk factors that could prevent or delay cataract formation.
Topics: Age Factors; Blood Glucose; Cataract; Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 30209868
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3073 -
Endocrine Sep 2014Social determinants of health include the social and economic conditions that influence health status. Research into the impact of social determinants on individuals... (Review)
Review
Social determinants of health include the social and economic conditions that influence health status. Research into the impact of social determinants on individuals with type 2 diabetes has largely focused on the prevention of or risk of developing diabetes. No review exists summarizing the impact of social determinants of health outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. This systematic review examined whether social determinants of health have an impact on health outcomes in type 2 diabetes. Medline was searched for articles that (a) were published in English (b) targeted adults, ages 18 + years, (c) had a study population which was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, (d) the study was done in the United States, and (e) the study measured at least one of the outcome measures-glycemic control, cholesterol (LDL), blood pressure, quality of life or cost. Using a reproducible strategy, 2,110 articles were identified, and 61 were reviewed based on inclusion criteria. Twelve were categorized as Economic Stability and Education, 17 were categorized as Social and Community Context, 28 were categorized as Health and Health Care, and three were categorized as Neighborhood and Built Environment. Based on the studies reviewed, social determinants have an impact on glycemic control, LDL, and blood pressure to varying degrees. The impact on cost and quality of life was not often measured, but when quality of life was investigated, it did show significance. More research is needed to better characterize the direct impact of social determinants of health on health outcomes in diabetes.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Prognosis; Quality of Life; Social Determinants of Health; Young Adult
PubMed: 24532079
DOI: 10.1007/s12020-014-0195-0