American Diabetes Association
Browse
dc22-1253-File005-Oct 19.pdf (175.02 kB)

Pharmacologic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in the United States, Sweden, and Israel

Download (175.02 kB)
Version 2 2022-11-02, 22:24
Version 1 2022-10-25, 13:36
figure
posted on 2022-11-02, 22:24 authored by Beini Lyu, Yingying Sang, Elizabeth Selvin, Alex R. Chang, G Caleb Alexander, Cheli Melzer-Cohen, Josef Coresh, Varda Shalev, Gabriel Chodick, Avraham Karasik, Juan Jesús Carrero, Edouard L Fu, Yang Xu, Morgan E. Grams, Jung-Im Shin

  

Abstract

Objectives To characterize and compare glucose-lowering medication use in type 2 diabetes in the US, Sweden, and Israel, including adoption of newer medications and prescribing patterns.

Research Design and Methods We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from the US, Stockholm CREAtinine Measurements project (SCREAM) from Sweden, and Maccabi Healthcare Services from Israel. Specific pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes between 2007 and 2018 were examined.  

Results Use of glucose-lowering medications among patients with type 2 diabetes was substantially lower in the US and SCREAM than in Maccabi (66.0% in NHANES, 68.4% in SCREAM, and 88.1% in Maccabi in 2017-2018). Among patients who took at least one glucose-lowering medication in 2017-2018, metformin use was also lower in the US and SCREAM (74.1% in NHANES, 75.9% in SCREAM, and 92.6% in Maccabi) whereas sulfonylureas use was greater in the US (31.5% in NHANES, 16.0% in SCREAM, and 14.9% in Maccabi). Adoption of DPP4i and SGLT2i were slower in the US and SCREAM than Maccabi. History of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, reduced kidney function, and albuminuria were not consistently associated with greater use of SGLT2i or GLP1RA across the three countries.  

Conclusions There were substantial differences in real-world use of glucose-lowering medications across the US, Sweden, and Israel, with more optimal pharmacologic management in Israel. Variation in access to care and medication cost across countries may have contributed to these differences. SGLT2i and GLP1RA use in high-risk patients was limited in all three countries during this time period.

Funding

NIH/NHLBI x K24 HL152440

NIH/NIDDK x K01DK121825

Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) x K24HL155861 R01DK115534

Swedish Research Council x 2019-01059

History

Usage metrics

    Diabetes Care

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC