Individualised treatment goals in diabetes care

Abstract

Objectives – To examine 1) patients’ characteristics according to the treatment goal chosen at diabetes diagnosis, and 2) the association between individualised goals for glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure (BP) and lipids, and the risk factor level subsequently achieved.

Design – Follow-up study embedded in a multifaceted intervention study directed at doctors encouraging individualised goal-setting in newly diagnosed diabetic patients aged ≥40 years.

Setting – General practice.

Subjects – In all, 243 general practitioners and 674 patients participated.

Main outcome measures – Risk factors for diabetic complications.

Results – Relatively young age, low diagnostic plasma glucose, low BMI, a moderate or high level of physical activity and normoalbuminuria were associated with a treatment goal of good control at diagnosis. After 5 years, median HbA1c was 8.2%, 8.6% and 8.0% in patients with a goal of good, acceptable and poor control, respectively. Patients with a goal of good control versus those with a goal of acceptable control had a lower HbA1c level in a regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, HbA1c at diagnosis, BMI, total cholesterol, fasting triglycerides, BP, physical activity, smoking status and diabetes duration. We found no association between goals and the level of BP and lipids.

Conclusion – Doctors tend to pursue normoglycaemia in relatively young patients with low blood glucose, low BMI, high activity level and normoalbuminuria. Patients for whom a goal of normoglycaemia was chosen at diagnosis achieved favourable glycaemic control at 5-year follow-up. Whether doctors choosing the goals were good at predicting future glycaemic control, or whether goal-setting is an important motivational factor in achieving optimal glycaemic control needs to be explored.

• diabetes mellitus
• family practice
• goal-setting
• glycaemic control
• health services research

Scand J Prim Health Care 2004;22:71–77. ISSN 0281-3432

Scand J Prim Health Care 2004;22:71–77. ISSN 0281-3432