OBJECTIVE -To review the effectiveness of interventions targeted at health care professionals and/or the structure of care in order to improve the management of diabetes in primary care, outpatient, and community settings. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS-A systematic review of controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of interventions targeted at health care professionals and aimed at improving the process of care or patient outcomes for patients with diabetes was performed. Standard search methods of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group were used.RESULTS -A total of 41 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies identified were heterogeneous in terms of interventions, participants, settings, and reported outcomes. In all studies, the interventions were multifaceted. The interventions were targeted at health care professionals only in 12 studies, at the organization of care only in 9 studies, and at both in 20 studies. Complex professional interventions improved the process of care, but the effect on patient outcomes remained less clear because such outcomes were rarely assessed. Organizational interventions that facilitated the structured and regular review of patients also showed a favorable effect on process measures. Complex interventions in which patient education was added and/or the role of a nurse was enhanced led to improvements in patient outcomes as well as the process of care.CONCLUSIONS -Multifaceted professional interventions and organizational interventions that facilitate structured and regular review of patients were effective in improving the process of care. The addition of patient education to these interventions and the enhancement of the role of nurses in diabetes care led to improvements in patient outcomes and the process of care. Diabetes Care 24:1821-1833, 2001D iabetes is a major and growing health care problem. Primarily because of the increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes as well as the increase in cases of type 1 diabetes (1), it is expected that the number of people with diabetes will double by the year 2010 (2).Diabetes accounts for a huge burden of morbidity and mortality through micro-and macrovascular complications (3,4). However, it is now clear that strict control of blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol can reduce the risk of diabetes-related complications (5-8). To achieve strict control, structured care is needed (9).Over the past 20 years, the responsibility for the care of people with diabetes has shifted away from hospitals to primary care (10,11). During this period, randomized trials have demonstrated that if regular review of patients is guaranteed, the standard of primary care can be as good or better than hospital outpatient care in the short term (9). Several guidelines and diabetes management programs have been developed nationally and locally to improve diabetes care in the community. However, empirical data suggest that compliance with diabetes clinical practice recommendations is inadequate in primary care (12)(13)(14...

These data indicate that in diabetic patients, niacin (i) is effective for treating diabetic dyslipidaemias associated with both the atherogenic lipid profile and Lp(a); (ii) must be used with modern and aggressive oral hypoglycaemic agents or insulin treatment; and (iii) is an important drug to treat diabetes dyslipidaemias because of its broad spectrum of effectiveness.

No abstract

No abstract

Context.—The atherogenic lipid phenotype is a major cardiovascular risk factor, but normal values do not exist derived from 1 analysis in a general study group. Objective.—To determine normal values of all of the atherogenic lipid phenotype parameters using subjects from a general study group. Design.—One hundred two general subjects were used to determine their atherogenic lipid phenotype using polyacrylamide gradient gels. Results.—Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) size revealed 24% of subjects express LDL phenotype B, defined as average LDL peak particle size 258 Å or less; however, among the Chinese subjects, the expression of the B phenotype was higher at 44% (P = .02). For the total group, mean LDL size was 265 ± 11 Å (1 SD); however, histograms were bimodal in both men and women. After excluding subjects expressing LDL phenotype B, because they are at increased cardiovascular risk and thus are not completely healthy, LDL histograms were unimodal and the mean LDL size was 270 ± 7 Å. A small, dense LDL concentration histogram (total group) revealed skewing; thus, phenotype B subjects were excluded, for the rationale described previously, and the mean value was 13 ± 9 mg/dL (0.33 ± 0.23 mmol/L). High-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol histograms were bimodal in both sexes. After removing subjects as described previously or if HDL cholesterol levels were less than 45 mg/dL, histograms were unimodal and revealed a mean HDL cholesterol value of 61 ± 12 mg/dL (1.56 ± 0.31 mmol/L). HDL 2, HDL 2a, and HDL 2b were similarly evaluated. Conclusions.—Approximate normal values for the atherogenic lipid phenotype, similar to those derived from cardiovascular endpoint trials, can be determined if those high proportions of subjects with dyslipidemic cardiovascular risk are excluded.