D iabetes mellitus is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and ongoing patient self-management education and support 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, payers, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, general 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. Specifically titled sections of the standards address children with diabetes, pregnant women, and people with prediabetes. These standards are not intended to preclude clinical judgment or more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information about management of diabetes, refer to references 1–3. The recommendations included are screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A large number of these interventions have been shown to be cost-effective (4). A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) andmodeled after existingmethods, 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. These standards of care are revised annually by the ADA’s multidisciplinary Professional Practice Committee, incorporating new evidence. For the current revision, committee members systematically searched Medline for human studies related to each subsection and published since 1 January 2010. Recommendations (bulleted at the beginning of each subsection and also listed in the “Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012”) were revised based on new evidence or, in some cases, to clarify the prior recommendation or match the strength of the wording to the strength of the evidence. A table linking the changes in recommendations to new evidence can be reviewed at http:// professional.diabetes.org/CPR_Search. aspx. Subsequently, as is the case for all Position Statements, the standards of care were reviewed and approved by the ExecutiveCommittee of ADA’s Board ofDirectors, which includes health care professionals, scientists, and lay people. Feedback from the larger clinical community was valuable for the 2012 revision of the standards. Readers who wish to comment on the “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012” are invited to do so at http://professional.diabetes.org/ CPR_Search.aspx. Members of the Professional Practice Committee disclose all potential financial conflicts of interest with industry. These disclosures were discussed at the onset of the standards revisionmeeting. Members of the committee, their employer, and their disclosed conflicts of interest are listed in the “Professional PracticeCommitteeMembers” table (see pg. S109). The AmericanDiabetes Association funds development of the standards and all its position statements out of its general revenues and does not utilize industry support for these purposes.

https://www.science-open.com/document_file/bb04d9d0-b3df-4133-9494-e71e300f4279/PubMedCentral/bb04d9d0-b3df-4133-9494-e71e300f4279.pdf

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2012

https://www.scienceopen.com/document_file/57689460-a74a-45be-b1a0-a3e9cd0c5d62/PubMedCentral/57689460-a74a-45be-b1a0-a3e9cd0c5d62.pdf

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2013

American association of clinical endocrinologists and american college of endocrinology comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for medical care of patients with obesity.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(13)60734-5.pdf

Adult obstructive sleep apnoea.

This paper considers the argument for obesity as a chronic relapsing disease process. Obesity is viewed from an epidemiological model, with an agent affecting the host and producing disease. Food is the primary agent, particularly foods that are high in energy density such as fat, or in sugar-sweetened beverages. An abundance of food, low physical activity and several other environmental factors interact with the genetic susceptibility of the host to produce positive energy balance. The majority of this excess energy is stored as fat in enlarged, and often more numerous fat cells, but some lipid may infiltrate other organs such as the liver (ectopic fat). The enlarged fat cells and ectopic fat produce and secrete a variety of metabolic, hormonal and inflammatory products that produce damage in organs such as the arteries, heart, liver, muscle and pancreas. The magnitude of the obesity and its adverse effects in individuals may relate to the virulence or toxicity of the environment and its interaction with the host. Thus, obesity fits the epidemiological model of a disease process except that the toxic or pathological agent is food rather than a microbe. Reversing obesity will prevent most of its detrimental effects.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/obr.12551

Obesity: a chronic relapsing progressive disease process. A position statement of the World Obesity Federation.

OBJECTIVE To assess the risk factors for the presence and severity of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) among obese patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Unattended polysomnography was performed in 306 participants.

RESULTS Over 86% of participants had OSA with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5 events/h. The mean AHI was 20.5 ± 16.8 events/h. A total of 30.5% of the participants had moderate OSA (15 ≤ AHI <30), and 22.6% had severe OSA (AHI ≥30). Waist circumference (odds ratio 1.1; 95% CI 1.0–1.1; P = 0.03) was significantly related to the presence of OSA. Severe OSA was most likely in individuals with a higher BMI (odds ratio 1.1; 95% CI 1.0–1.2; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS Physicians should be particularly cognizant of the likelihood of OSA in obese patients with type 2 diabetes, especially among individuals with higher waist circumference and BMI.

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/32/6/1017.full.pdf

F. Xavier Pi Sunyer

Papers

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Among Obese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes