Aims: This survey aimed to evaluate the current management and screening of coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Europe, utilizing... Show moreAims: This survey aimed to evaluate the current management and screening of coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Europe, utilizing the 2013 ESC/EASD (European Society of Cardiology/European Association for the Study of Diabetes) guidelines as a benchmark. Methods: The PADDIA/CADDIA survey is a European medical research collaboration targeting cardiologists, vascular physicians, diabetologists and general practitioners from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and United Kingdom. Results: The questionnaire was completed by sixty-three physicians, of whom 75% declared assessing the cardiovascular risk of people with T2DM mostly without using a risk score (59%). More than 90% of the panel, check HbA1c, blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets in their patients with T2DM and coronary or peripheral artery disease. For 94% the presence of T2DM influence their patients' management, by optimizing blood glucose, blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control. Only 37% considered screening for lower extremity peripheral artery disease among their T2DM patients and 35% among those with cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: Physicians mostly follow the ESC/EASD 2013 guidelines, but when it comes to screening for additional conditions including coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease, or intensifying the antithrombotic regimen there is need for better guidance. (C) 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Show less
AIM: Although diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening is a basic component of diabetes care, uptake of screening programs is less than optimal. Because attendance rates and reasons for non-attendance... Show moreAIM: Although diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening is a basic component of diabetes care, uptake of screening programs is less than optimal. Because attendance rates and reasons for non-attendance in an unselected diabetes population are unknown, this study examines incentives and barriers to attend DR-screening. METHOD: Four focus groups provided patient-related themes concerning individual decision-making regarding attendance at DR-screening. A questionnaire measuring attendance rates and the influence of several factors was sent to 3236 diabetes patients (>18 years) in 20 Dutch general practices, of which 2363 (73%) responded. RESULTS: In the past 3 years, 81% of the patients had attended DR-screening. Patients not attending had lower levels of education, a more recent diagnosis of diabetes, and less frequently used insulin. There was no difference in DM types 1 and 2 patients regarding attendance. Patients attending more often visited health-care providers. Patients reported 'knowledge of detrimental effects of DR on visual acuity', 'sense of duty' and 'fear of impaired vision' as main incentives. The main barrier was the absence of a recommendation by the health-care provider. CONCLUSION: Knowledge about detrimental effects of DR on visual acuity and recommendation by health-care providers are important, possibly modifiable, factors in the attendance to DR screening. Show less
