Tag

Tagged: type 2 diabetes

Sponsored
 

 

Type-2 diabetes will not be prevented by repeating past failures

  • England has embarked on a national diabetes prevention programme (DPP)
  • In the UK, 64% of adults are classed as being overweight or obese
  • Obesity is the main risk factor for type-2 diabetes
  • Over the past decade diabetes in the UK has increased by 60% and now affects 4m
  • Diabetes care consumes about 10% of the NHS’s annual budget of £116.4bn
  • Traditional diabetes care and education fail to dent the UK’s diabetes burden
  • The national DPP has got off to a slow start
  • Type-2 diabetes will not be prevented by repeating past failures
  • Lessons can be learnt from Oklahoma

 

Should we entrust an expensive national diabetes prevention programme to health officials who are failing?


DIABETES is a chronic disease, which occurs when the pancreas does not produce enough of the hormone insulin, or when the body cannot effectively use the insulin it produces. This leads to an increased concentration of glucose in the blood (hyperglycaemia). Type-1 diabetes is characterized by a lack of insulin production. Type-2 diabetes is caused by the body's ineffective use of insulin, and often results from excess body weight and physical inactivity

In the video below Sufyan Hussain describes type-2 diabetes; its propensity among certain ethnic groups, and some of its complications. Dr Hussain is a Darzi Fellow in Clinical Leadership, Specialist Registrar and Honorary Clinical Lecturer in Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust and Imperial College London. Also in the video are Richard Lane, former President of DUK who draws attention to pre-diabetes, and a patient with type-2 diabetes who describes his diagnosis and family history.
 



      
       (click on the image to play) 
 

The national diabetes prevention programme (DPP)

In March 2015 NHS England, Public Health England (PHE) and Diabetes UK (DUK) launched the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme, (DPP), with the objective to limit the number of people developing type-2 diabetes. The DPP is an expensive national initiative expected to enrol up to five million people with blood sugar levels so high that they are at risk of the disease. See: Preventing diabetes in high-risk people.
 
There are too many people on the cusp of developing type-2 diabetes, and we can change that. The growing body of evidence makes us confident that our national diabetes prevention programme will reduce the numbers of those at risk of going on to develop the debilitating disease,” says Professor Jonathan Valabhji, national clinical director for diabetes and obesity at NHS England, and one of the leaders of the DPP.
 

Eye-watering costs for failure

The UK’s record of diabetes care and prevention is poor. Despite £14bn being spent annually by the NHS on diabetes care, and some £20 million annually by DUK on diabetes education and awareness programmes, over the past 10 years people with diabetes have increased by 60%. Those responsible for diabetes care and support have not been held accountable, but continue to provide care and support that is failing to reduce the devastating personal, social and economic burden of diabetes. As a consequence the situation is becoming grave.
 
The latest figures from DUK suggest that the number of people with diabetes has topped four million - 8% of England’s adult population - and is on course to reach five million in less than a decade. In addition, there are currently 5 million people in England at high risk of developing type-2 diabetes. 64% of adults in the UK are either overweight or obese, which is the principal risk factor of type-2 diabetes. According to Professor Dame Sally Davies, the Chief Medical Officer, soaring rates of obesity pose such a threat that they should be treated as a “national risk” alongside terrorism. 

If nothing changes, diabetes treatment costs alone could bankrupt the NHS. Despite these trends and the poor record of prevention and management, health officials leading the DPP confidently say that the new national programme will make a significant impact on the prevention of type-2 diabetes, and save £3 for every £1 spent. Officials however do not produce figures showing what the upfront costs of the programme will be.
 
Duncan Selbie, CEO of PHE and a leader of the DPP, said: “We know how to lower the risk of developing type-2 diabetes: lose weight, exercise and eat healthily  . . . . PHE’s evidence review shows that supporting people along the way will help them protect their health, and that’s what our prevention programme will do.” In 2015-16, the DPP aims to support up to 10,000 people at risk of type-2 diabetes with “motivational coaches”, paid for by the NHS, to provide advice on weight loss, physical activity and diet.

The Public Accounts Committee takes up the cudgels

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has expressed serious criticisms of the way in which the DPP is setting about its task of limiting the number of people who develop type-2 diabetes.   

It has said that the DPP is presenting an, "unduly healthy picture" of the state of diabetes services. "It’s not rocket science to tackle diabetes . . . . The NHS and Department for Health have been too slow in tackling diabetes, both in prevention and treatment . . . . . As a priority, action must be taken to ensure best practice in treatment and education is adopted across the board . . . . Taxpayers must have confidence that support is available when and where it is needed," says Meg Hillier, Chair of the PAC.
 

Not keeping pace

The PAC complained that the DPP’s approach lacked urgency, as some 200,000 people are newly diagnosed with diabetes every year, and it stressed that most people would be shocked to know that around 22,000 people with diabetes still die early every year.
 

Public Accounts Committee’s recommendations

The PAC said that the DPP, “will need to move at pace and at scale to stem the rising number of people with diabetes,” and recommended that by April 2016 the programme’s leaders, “set out a timetable to ramp up participation in the national DPP to 100,000 people a year, set out what it will cost, and how the programme will target those areas with the highest prevalence of diabetes. Public Health England should also set out how its other public health activities, such as marketing campaigns, will contribute to preventing diabetes.” The growing frustration of government officials with diabetes care and support is described in: Diabetes Wars
 
The PAC also expressed concerns about the low numbers of people either at risk of or living with diabetes who actually receive education to help them manage their condition. The committee recommended that the DPP, “develop a better and more flexible range of education support for diabetes patients.” Alternative diabetes educational programmes, which employ behavioural techniques to nudge people to change their diets and lifestyles, adhere to medication and get screened regularly, actually exist, but officials responsible for diabetes education turn a blind eye to these, and continue supporting traditional educational programmes that fail. See: Online video education can reduce the burden of diabetes and DUK and HealthPad agree on the importance of diabetes education
 

The Public Accounts Committee should demand more from the DPP

The PAC is right to recommend that the DPP “quickens its pace and increases its scope”; because, over the past 10 years, the NHS has spent more than £100bn on diabetes treatment alone, and DUK has spent some £200 million on education and awareness programmes, yet diabetes in the UK has increased by 60%.
 
Part of the responsibility for raising awareness and encouraging education among people living with diabetes falls to Diabetes UK, the largest and most influential charity for the condition in the UK. In addition to supporting research the charity is mandated to: (i) “Provide relief for people with diabetes and its related complications and to those who care for them, (ii) Promote the welfare of people with diabetes and its related complications and of those who care for them, and (iii) Advance the understanding of diabetes by education of people with diabetes, the health professionals and others who care for them, and the general public.”
 
Each year DUK spends about £20 million on, (i) raising awareness of diabetes, (ii) supporting self-management of the condition, and (iii) improving the quality of diabetes care. Despite this relatively large spend, DUK only manages to reach a relatively small percentage of the millions of people living with diabetes. For example in 2014, only 0.5% of people with diabetes used the DUK care line, the charity sent information packs to only 1.25% of the people with diabetes, only 0.3% signed up for e-learning courses, and only 0.4% of the 5 million people at risk of type-2 diabetes have used the DUK risk calculator. 
 
The PAC is also right to demand more effective and flexible education programmes to propel people to self-manage their condition. Only 16% of people diagnosed with diabetes are offered traditional educational courses, and only 4% of these actually take up the courses. This suggests that there is a crying need for organizations responsible for diabetes education and awareness programmes to increase their understanding of how to engage people and nudge them to change their diets and lifestyles, and improve their use of online communications technology, which makes servicing any number of patient groups, of any size, in any geography, easy and cheap.

More importance should be given to patient outcomes

The PAC should demand more from the DPP, and recommend that it measures and reports annually on the programme’s success in preventing those at risk of type-2 diabetes from developing the condition. “I’ve been struck again and again by how important measurement is to improving the human condition. You can achieve amazing progress if you set a clear goal and find a measure that will drive progress toward that goal . . . This may seem pretty basic, but it’s amazing to me how often it is not done,” says Bill Gates. An earlier Commentary drew attention to the fact that UK diabetes agencies responsible for spending millions each year on diabetes education and awareness programmes which fail, only report on the distribution of services, rather than on the impact those services have had on patient outcomes, which is the most appropriate way of measuring the programme’s effectiveness. See, The importance of measuring the impact of diabetes care.
 

Oklahoma: America’s fattest city

Contrast England’s national DPP with an American prevention programme developed and led by Mike Cornett, the mayor of Oklahoma City, which is known as the “fattest city in America”. Cornett dealt with the challenge very differently.
 

Rejected doctors’ advice

Spurred on by his own weight-loss regime after discovering he was classed as obese, Mike Cornett wanted to transform Oklahoma City into a place where obesity could no longer thrive. While he was aware of the on going debates among clinicians and medical researchers about the best strategies to prevent type-2 diabetes, Cornett was not convinced that traditional health officials had credible answers. On New Year's Eve 2007, Cornett announced that Oklahoma City was going to go on a diet to lose a collective one million pounds.
 
Cornett did not start his prevention strategy by spending money to review evidence from existing diabetes studies; he did not develop a ‘framework’ to be reviewed and sanctioned by an expert panel of clinicians; he neither initiated primary care pilot projects, nor set up demonstrator sites in GPs’ surgeries; and he did not ask doctors to identify people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia, defined as having an HbA1c of 42 – 47 mm/mol (6.0 – 6.4%) or a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of 5.5 - 6.9 mmol/mol.  In contrast, all the above was done by England’s DPP.
 

Losing one million pounds becomes a talking point

Having rejected the help of clinicians and healthcare officials, and without spending any money, Cornett started a website, thiscityisgoingonadiet.com, and encouraged citizens to register, and track how much weight they were losing.
 
His awareness campaign took off: churches set up running clubs, schools discussed diets, companies held contests to lose weight; restaurants competed to offer healthy meals. More importantly, people across the City began discussing obesity, which was a crisis spiralling out of control.  More than 51,000 people, 59% of those over 45, signed up to his website and lost weight. By January 2012, Oklahoma City reached its target of shedding one million pounds.  

Cornett was pleased that people had lost weight, but more importantly, he understood that the challenge was not over - it was just beginning. The hidden success of Cornett’s weight loss campaign was that he had successfully engaged an at-risk population. Obesity became a talking point. Mayor Cornett had successfully nudged a city population to change their diets and lifestyles and lose weight. “The message about nutrition and health penetrated Oklahoma City,” says Cornett.

Today, 30% of people in the central Oklahoma region, which includes Oklahoma City, are still obese. Oklahoma City’s obesity rates, while still rising, have been reduced from 6% to 1% a year.  In the lowest income areas of the City, which have the highest rates of diabetes complications, key indicators of diabetes have been reduced by between 2% and 10% in five years, and the City overall has seen a 3% fall in diabetes related mortality rates.

Changing the health of a community takes a long time - probably a generation,” says Cornett. On 7th April 2015, Oklahoma State introduced a law relating to diabetes prevention, which demanded “detailed action plans for battling diabetes with actionable items for consideration by the Legislature including, but not limited to, steps to reduce the impact of diabetes, pre-diabetes, and related diabetes complications.” This would not have happened had it not been for the actions and initiative taken by Mike Cornett.

Diabetes and the built environment

Now that a population was engaged, Cornett asked taxpayers for $777 million to fund projects designed to prevent type-2 diabetes in the long term by rebuilding Oklahoma City around the pedestrian rather than the car. The money was forthcoming and Cornett used it to change Oklahoma’s built environment by developing new parks, installing bicycle lanes, reducing driving lanes and introducing buses, creating a boating district, and building pavements, which had not been built for some 30 years. Recent years have seen growing research interest in the relationships between obesity and the built environment. Today, Oklahoma City is a real-time experiment for what happens when you alter the built environment that affects the way people live and behave. 

Takeaways

Preventing type-2 diabetes will not be achieved by a group of academic clinicians and healthcare officials repeating past failures. Preventing type-2 diabetes entails winning the battle against obesity, reducing poverty, and changing peoples’ diets and lifestyles. To do this you first have to engage people and nudge them to change their behaviour.

If the Secretary of State for Health is serious about preventing type-2 diabetes in the UK he would do well to learn from what Mayor Cornett accomplished.  Having done that, he should enlist the help of Mayor Boris Johnson to replace the current leaders of the national DPP.

 
view in full page
 

The importance of measuring the impact of diabetes care

  • Bill Gates says that measurement is key to reducing disease
  • Type-2 diabetes is the fastest growing health threat of our time, it is preventable, but not properly measured
  • Expensive diabetes programs fail to dent the burden of the disease
  • Taxpayers have a right to know the annual impact of diabetes care and education on the incidence, outcomes and costs of the disease
  • Healthcare agencies must agree and report clear goals that drive progress

Bill Gates is right. Measurement is central to the success of reducing the global incidence of diseases. Can we learn something from Bill Gates to help reverse the epidemic of type-2 diabetes: a preventable disease, which is spiralling out of control, and set to bankrupt healthcare systems?

Dr Syed Sufyan Hussain, Darzi Fellow in Clinical Leadership, Specialist Registrar and Clinical Lecturer in Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, at Imperial College London, describes the challenge:

      
             (click on the image to play the video) 
 

The UK

Similar to other developed nations, diabetes in the UK is the largest and fastest growing health challenge of our time. Since 1996, the number of people living with diabetes in the UK has more than doubled: 3.9 million people now have diabetes, another 9.6 million are at high risk of getting type-2 diabetes, and every year, that number is rising dramatically. If nothing changes, in 10 years time more than four million people in England will have diabetes. This suggests that current diabetes care programmes and education are failing.

Diabetes is expensive, and current annual treatment costs alone are about £10bn - some 10% of the annual NHS budget - and 80% of this is spent on managing avoidable complications. For example, diabetes is the most common cause of lower limb amputations, and over 6,000 happen each year in England alone. The result is frequently devastating in terms of social functioning and mood, and poses a considerable cost to healthcare providers, while the financial burden on patients and their families can be enormous.

The total annual costs of diabetes, which includes both direct and indirect costs, such as the loss of earnings because of illness, are difficult to measure, but are estimated to be about £24bn per year. If nothing changes, these costs are projected to rise to nearly £40bn in 20 years. This further suggests that current diabetes care programmes and education are failing. 
 

Doing more of the same 

In its 2015 State of the Nation Report, Diabetes UK (DUK), a large and influential charity, urged the UK Government and NHS England to do more in order to ensure that people with diabetes get the support and education they need to manage their condition. However, if the UK government and NHS England do more of the same, nothing will change, and diabetes will continue to escalate, destroying lives and costing billions. Let us go back to Bill Gates.
 

Measures to drive progress

I’ve been struck again and again by how important measurement is to improving the human condition. You can achieve amazing progress if you set a clear goal and find a measure that will drive progress toward that goal . . . . This may seem pretty basic, but it’s amazing to me how often it is not done,” says Gates.

The UK government, NHS England, Public Health England and DUK do not share an agreed set of indicators, which measure and report on the impact of diabetes care and education. Given that each year billions are spent on diabetes, these agencies should be obliged to report annually on the impact that their diabetes care and education programs have on the prevalence, outcomes and costs of diabetes. Let us return to Bill Gates, and his efforts to reduce the global burden of HIV.
 

Bill Gates 

The 2013 annual report of the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation stresses that it, “Enhances, the impact of every dollar invested by improving the efficiency and effectiveness of our HIV program, [which] supports efforts to reduce the global incidence of HIV significantly and sustainably, and to help people infected with HIV lead long, healthy, and productive lives. The global incidence of HIV has declined 20% since its peak in the mid-1990s.” 

Now, tweak the above paragraph to create a gold standard annual report of the state of diabetes in the UK. The government, NHS England, Public Health England and DUK, “Enhances the impact of every pound invested in diabetes by improving the efficiency and effectiveness of our diabetes programs and education [sic], which support efforts to reduce the UK’s incidence of diabetes significantly and sustainably, and to help people living with diabetes to lead long, healthy, and productive lives. [Notwithstanding,] since 1996, the UK’s incidence of diabetes has increased by 110%, complications have increased by 115%, and annual treatment costs have increased by at least £2bn.”
 

Changing demographics

In the above paragraph we used indicative numbers to show direction. Some, but not all, of the reported increases can be explained by demographic changes. For example, over the past 20 years, the UK’s population has increased by 5.5 million and aged, and now more than 18% are over 65, and this cohort is rising. According to the Office of National Statistics, 60% of the population increase is due to immigration. David Coleman, a professor of demographics at Oxford University, suggests that this mass influx of migrants has given the UK, Europe’s fastest-rising percentage of ethnic minority and foreign-born populations, and by 2040 foreigners and non-white Britons living here will double and make up one third of the UK population. 

This has important healthcare implications because type-2 diabetes is more than six times more common in people of South Asian descent, and up to three times more common among people of African and African-Caribbean origin. Studies show that people of Black and South Asian ethnicity also develop type-2 diabetes at an earlier age than people from the White population in the UK, generally about 10 years earlier. All these factors have a knock-on affect for healthcare. According to the Institute of Economic Affairs the changing demographics in the UK has created a “debt-time bomb’ that will require the end of universal free healthcare. 
 

Takeaways

Diabetes plays a prominent role in the health of the UK, and not all of its rising burden can be explained by changing demographics. The escalating burden of type-2 diabetes can be reduced and prevented by effective management and education, which engage people living with, or at risk of diabetes, and changes their behavior. Current education programs fail to do this. 

Instead of asking the government and NHS England to, “do more”, is it not time for those responsible for diabetes care to learn from Bill Gate, and, agree and report annually, measures that inform on the impact that diabetes care and education is having on the incidence, outcomes and costs of diabetes? 

 
view in full page

 

 
Preventing diabetes in high-risk people
  • NHS England is to spearhead a national diabetes prevention program
  • The program aims to prevent diabetes in high risk people by 2025
  • 35% of adults in the UK are living with pre-diabetes
  • The program MUST report outcomes NOT delivered services
  • Type-2 diabetes devastates millions of lives and costs billions
  • Big Data strategies can help NHS England improve patient outcomes

Early in 2015, NHS England, Public Health England, and Diabetes UK (the Troika), announced a national joint initiative to prevent diabetes developing in high-risk people by 2025, and declared that England should be, “The most successful country on the planet at implementing a national diabetes prevention programme.” 

Forced to act
About 35% of adults in the UK are living with pre-diabetes, a condition in which your blood sugar level is higher than normal, but not high enough to be classified as type-2 diabetes. It’s caused by obesity, sedentary lifestyles, dietary trends, and an ageing population, and without appropriate action, pre-diabetics will develop type-2 diabetes; a disease that reduces life-expectancy, and can lead to complications such as blindness, and amputation that seriously affect quality of life, and costs billions.       

Dr Roni Saha, a consultant in acute medicine, diabetes and endocrinology at St George’s Hospital, London describes pre-diabetes: 

        
 
Importance of patient outcomes.
It’s important that the Troika uses patient outcomes, and NOT delivered services as an indicator of its performance. Diabetes agencies regularly report services they deliver, while the prevalence and the cost of diabetes continue to escalate. Outcome data help people take an active role in their healthcare, and provide health providers important feedback, which informs the re-allocation of scarce resources to further enhance patient outcomes, and reduce costs.  

Immediately, the Troika announced its initiative, doctors raised concerns about the additional burden it would place on GPs. World renowned heart surgeon Devi Shetty, the founder and Chairman of Narayana Health, India, views doctors as significant obstacles to the introduction of technologies, which can improve significantly patient outcomes:

        

Big data
The Troika might consider using Big Data to enhance the performance of its diabetes initiative. Big Data can pool the experiences of people with pre-diabetes, suggest which regimens work best for which individuals, allow health providers to evaluate diet and lifestyles practices, and compare them within and across organizations and communities. Information about blood sugar levels, and hypertensive blood pressure can be transmitted directly into electronic health records of people with pre-diabetes. Data systems can notify health providers of problematic trends with individuals, which gives them an opportunity to intervene early, perhaps with just a telephone call, rather than waiting for an emergent and costly episode.

NHS England is selectively using the John Hopkins’ Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACGs) system, which should be a contender to support the Troika’s diabetes prevention initiative. ACG is a clinically inspired risk stratification and predictive modeling tool, which draws on demographic, diagnostic, pharmacy, and utilization data from primary and secondary care, to assess the health status of a population in order to plan services, budget and manage resources, and assess patient outcomes. 

Beyond the clinic
Big Data can also monitor people living with pre-diabetes outside the clinic. By linking patients’ shopping histories, social media, and location information through third-party data vendors, health providers can gain a window into peoples’ daily health behavior, thought to determine up to 50% of peoples’ overall health status. This is important for preventing diabetes developing in high-risk groups.

Instead of thinking from the patient level up, there are now enough good data to examine whole populations, and extrapolate what will happen to an individual at risk of developing type-2 diabetes. Big Data can create a convenient, real-time healthcare experience for people living with pre-diabetes. Insights gleaned from the data can improve the quality and accessibility of peoples’ care, and help foster a spirit of cooperation between patients, communities and health providers.

Security 
No data is more personal than health data, and patients expect extra privacy protection if they are to participate in Big Data projects. One simple approach is to anonymize the data. Even for internal reporting and research, providers would not be able to gain access to identity information, and this is reassuring to patients..

Takeaway
Will England become, “The most successful country on the planet at implementing a national diabetes prevention program”? Will the Troika successfully prevent pre-diabetics from developing type-2 diabetes? If the Troika’s program fails to improve patient outcomes, who will be held responsible? 
 
 
view in full page