AIM: To evaluate the impact of a Ramadan-focused diabetes education programme on hypoglycaemic risk and other clinical and metabolic parameters.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies meeting the inclusion criteria from inception. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and guidelines were followed when performing the search and identification of appropriate studies.
RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this systemic review; five of them met the criteria to compile for a meta-analysis. The included studies were with various study designs, including randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental and non-randomised studies. Overall, the results revealed a significant reduction of hypoglycemia risk (81% reduction) for fasting patients in intervention groups who received Ramadan-focused education compared with patients receiving conventional care (OR 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.46). Moreover, HbA1c significantly improved amongst patients who received a Ramadan-focused diabetes education intervention, compared with those receiving conventional care.
CONCLUSION: Ramadan-focused diabetes education had a significant impact on hypoglycemia and glycaemic control, with no significant effect on body weight, blood lipids or blood pressure.
METHODS: DIA-RAMADAN was a real-world, observational, international, non-comparative study. The global study population was divided into three regional subgroups, with data gathered at inclusion 6-8 weeks prior to Ramadan (V0), during Ramadan (4.5 weeks) and 4-6 weeks after Ramadan (V1). Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting ≥ 1 symptomatic hypoglycaemic events (HE), which were collected using a patient diary along with other adverse events.
RESULTS: Patient numbers from the three regions were n = 564 (46.5%; Indian sub-continent), n = 354 (29.1%; Middle East) and n = 296 (24.4%; South-East Asia). Patient baseline characteristics, demographics, fasting habits and antidiabetic treatments varied between regions. There were similar proportions of symptomatic HE between regions, with no severe HE. Significant weight reductions were observed in all regions following Ramadan, along with reductions in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose.
CONCLUSION: These real-world study data indicate that gliclazide MR is safe and effective for management of type 2 diabetes during Ramadan in all three regions studied as part of DIA-RAMADAN.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04132934. INFOGRAPHIC.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CMI on medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes in Qatar.
METHODS: We developed and customised CMI for all the anti-diabetic medications used in Qatar. A randomised controlled trial in which the intervention group patients (n = 66) received the customised CMI with usual care, while the control group patients (n = 74) received usual care only, was conducted. Self-reported medication adherence and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c ) were the primary outcome measures. Glycaemic control and medication adherence parameters were measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months in both groups. Medication adherence was measured using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8).
RESULTS: Although the addition of CMI resulted in better glycaemic control, this did not reach statistical significance, possibly because of the short-term follow-up. The median MMAS-8 score improved from baseline (6.6 [IQR = 1.5]) to 6-month follow-up (7.0 [IQR = 1.00]) in the intervention group. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference between the intervention and the control groups in terms of MMAS-8 score at the third visit (7.0 [IQR = 1.0]) vs 6.5 (IQR = 1.25; P-value = .010).
CONCLUSION: CMI for anti-diabetic medications when added to usual care has the potential to improve medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes. Therefore, providing better health communication and CMI to patients with diabetes is recommended.
METHOD: A multicenter cross-sectional observational study was conducted in 388 diabetes patients attending daily diabetes clinics and teaching hospitals in Pakistan's twin city between August 2019 and February 2020. The chi-square test and linear regression were used to detect RLS-related factors in type 2 diabetes mellitus.
RESULTS: The prevalence of RLS found was; 3.1% patients with diabetes were suffering from very severe RLS, 23.5% from severe RLS, 34% from moderate RLS, 21.1% from mild RLS and 18.3% from non-RLS. Gender, age, education, blood glucose fasting (BSF), blood glucose random (BSR) and HBA1c were found to be significant predictors of RLS in patients with diabetes.
CONCLUSION: Policy makers can develop local interventions to curb the growing RLS prevalence by keeping in control the risk factors of RLS in people living with type 2 diabetes.