Browsing by Author "Bilik, Dori"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Predictors and Impact of Intensification of Antihyperglycemic Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes
    (American Diabetes Association, 2009-02-19) McEwen, Laura N.; Bilik, Dori; Johnson, Susan L.; Halter, Jeffrey B.; Karter, Andrew J.; Mangione, Carol M.; Subramanian, Usha; Waitzfelder, Beth; Crosson, Jesse C.; Herman, William H.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to examine the predictors of intensification of antihyperglycemic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes; its impact on A1C, body weight, symptoms of anxiety/depression, and health status; and patient characteristics associated with improvement in A1C. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We analyzed survey, medical record, and health plan administrative data collected in Translating Research into Action for Diabetes (TRIAD). We examined patients who were using diet/exercise or oral antihyperglycemic medications at baseline, had A1C >7.2%, and stayed with the same therapy or intensified therapy (initiated or increased the number of classes of oral antihyperglycemic medications or began insulin) over 18 months. RESULTS Of 1,093 patients, 520 intensified therapy with oral medications or insulin. Patients intensifying therapy were aged 58 ± 12 years, had diabetes duration of 11 ± 9 years, and had A1C of 9.1 ± 1.5%. Younger age and higher A1C were associated with therapy intensification. Compared with patients who did not intensify therapy, those who intensified therapy experienced a 0.49% reduction in A1C (P < 0.0001), a 3-pound increase in weight (P = 0.003), and no change in anxiety/depression (P = 0.5) or health status (P = 0.2). Among those who intensified therapy, improvement in A1C was associated with higher baseline A1C, older age, black race/ethnicity, lower income, and more physician visits. CONCLUSIONS Treatment intensification improved glycemic control with no worsening of anxiety/depression or health status, especially in elderly, lower-income, and minority patients with type 2 diabetes. Interventions are needed to overcome clinical inertia when patients might benefit from treatment intensification and improved glycemic control.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Primary Language, Income and the Intensification of Anti-glycemic Medications in Managed Care: the (TRIAD) Study
    (2010-12) Duru, O Kenrik; Bilik, Dori; McEwen, Laura N.; Brown, Arleen F.; Karter, Andrew J.; Curb, J David; Marrero, David G.; Lu, Shou-En; Rodriguez, Michael; Mangione, Carol M.
    BACKGROUND Patients who speak Spanish and/or have low socioeconomic status are at greater risk of suboptimal glycemic control. Inadequate intensification of anti-glycemic medications may partially explain this disparity. OBJECTIVE To examine the associations between primary language, income, and medication intensification. DESIGN Cohort study with 18-month follow-up. PARTICIPANTS One thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine patients with Type 2 diabetes who were not using insulin enrolled in the Translating Research into Action for Diabetes Study (TRIAD), a study of diabetes care in managed care. MEASUREMENTS Using administrative pharmacy data, we compared the odds of medication intensification for patients with baseline A1c ≥ 8%, by primary language and annual income. Covariates included age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, Charlson score, diabetes duration, baseline A1c, type of diabetes treatment, and health plan. RESULTS Overall, 42.4% of patients were taking intensified regimens at the time of follow-up. We found no difference in the odds of intensification for English speakers versus Spanish speakers. However, compared to patients with incomes <15,000,patientswithincomesof15,000-39,999(OR1.43,1.07−1.92),40,000-74,999(OR1.62,1.16−2.26)or>75,000 (OR 2.22, 1.53-3.24) had increased odds of intensification. This latter pattern did not differ statistically by race. CONCLUSIONS Low-income patients were less likely to receive medication intensification compared to higher-income patients, but primary language (Spanish vs. English) was not associated with differences in intensification in a managed care setting. Future studies are needed to explain the reduced rate of intensification among low income patients in managed care.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Thiazolidinediones and Fractures: Evidence from Translating Research into Action for Diabetes
    (2010-10) Bilik, Dori; McEwen, Laura N.; Brown, Morton B.; Pomeroy, Nathan E.; Kim, Catherine; Asao, Keiko; Crosson, Jesse C.; Duru, O Kenrik; Ferrara, Assiamira; Hsiao, Victoria C.; Karter, Andrew J.; Lee, Pearl G.; Marrero, David G.; Selby, Joe V.; Subramanian, Usha; Herman, William H.
    Background: Thiazolidinedione (TZD) treatment has been associated with fractures. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between TZD treatment and fractures in type 2 diabetic patients. Methods: Using data from Translating Research into Action for Diabetes, a multicenter prospective observational study of diabetes care in managed care, we conducted a matched case-control study to assess the odds of TZD exposure in patients with type 2 diabetes with and without fractures. We identified 786 cases based on fractures detected in health plan administrative data. Up to four controls without any fracture diagnoses were matched to each case. Controls were matched on health plan, date of birth within 5 yr, sex, race/ethnicity, and body mass index within 5 kg/m2. We performed conditional logistic regression for premenopausal and postmenopausal women and men to assess the odds of exposure to potential risk factors for fracture, including medications, self-reported limited mobility, and lower-extremity amputations. Results: We found statistically significant increased odds of exposure to TZDs, glucocorticoids, loop diuretics, and self-reported limited mobility for women 50 yr of age and older with fractures. Exposure to both loop diuretics and TZDs, glucocorticoids, and insulin and limited mobility and lower-extremity amputation were associated with fractures in men. Conclusion: Postmenopausal women taking TZDs and the subset of men taking both loop diuretics and TZDs were at increased risk for fractures. In postmenopausal women, risk was associated with higher TZD dose. No difference between rosiglitazone and pioglitazone was apparent.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Thiazolidinediones, Cardiovascular Disease and Cardiovascular Mortality: Translating Research Into Action For Diabetes (TRIAD)
    (2010-07) Bilik, Dori; McEwen, Laura N.; Brown, Morton B.; Selby, Joe V.; Karter, Andrew J.; Marrero, David G.; Hsiao, Victoria C.; Tseng, Chien-Wen; Mangione, Carol M.; Lasser, Norman L.; Crosson, Jesse C.; Herman, William H.
    Background Studies have associated thiazolidinedione (TZD) treatment with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and questioned whether the two available TZDs, rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, have different CVD risks. We compared CVD incidence, cardiovascular (CV), and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetic patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone as their only TZD. Methods We analyzed survey, medical record, administrative, and National Death Index (NDI) data from 1999 through 2003 from Translating Research Into Action for Diabetes (TRIAD), a prospective observational study of diabetes care in managed care. Medications, CV procedures, and CVD were determined from health plan (HP) administrative data, and mortality was from NDI. Adjusted hazard rates (AHR) were derived from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, income, history of diabetic nephropathy, history of CVD, insulin use, and HP. Results Across TRIAD's 10 HPs, 1,815 patients (24%) filled prescriptions for a TZD, 773 (10%) for only rosiglitazone, 711 (10%) for only pioglitazone, and 331 (4%) for multiple TZDs. In the seven HPs using both TZDs, 1,159 patients (33%) filled a prescription for a TZD, 564 (16%) for only rosiglitazone, 334 (10%) for only pioglitazone, and 261 (7%) for multiple TZDs. For all CV events, CV, and all-cause mortality, we found no significant difference between rosiglitazone and pioglitazone. Conclusions In this relatively small, prospective, observational study, we found no statistically significant differences in CV outcomes for rosiglitazone- compared to pioglitazone-treated patients. There does not appear to be a pattern of clinically meaningful differences in CV outcomes for rosiglitazone- versus pioglitazone-treated patients. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.