Skip Navigation
Menu
Ideas and Opinions |21 August 2018

Brief Commentary: The Glycemic Target Guideline Controversy: Same Evidence, Different Perspectives, and a Proposal for Common Ground

David C. Aron, MD, MS; Paul R. Conlin, MD; Leonard Pogach, MD, MBA

Article, Author, and Disclosure Information
Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
This article was published at Annals.org on 26 June 2018.
  • Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio (D.C.A.)
    VA Boston Healthcare System, West Roxbury, Massachusetts (P.R.C.)
    Veterans Affairs Central Office, Washington, DC (L.P.)

    Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not to be construed as those of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the U.S. Department of Defense.

    Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M18-1342.

    Corresponding Author: Leonard Pogach, MD, MBA, Veterans Affairs Central Office, Office of Specialty Care (P11), 810 Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20420; e-mail, Leonard.Pogach@va.gov.

    Current Author Addresses: Dr. Aron: Director, Clinical Program Research and Evaluation, Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center Administrative, Building EUL 5M677, 10701 East Boulevard, Cleveland, OH 44106.

    Dr. Conlin: Chief, Medical Service, VA Boston Healthcare System, 1400 Veterans of Foreign Wars Parkway, West Roxbury, MA 02132.

    Dr. Pogach: Veterans Affairs Central Office, Office of Specialty Care (P11), 810 Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20420.

    Author Contributions: Conception and design: L. Pogach.

    Drafting of the article: L. Pogach.

    Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: P.R. Conlin, L. Pogach.

    Final approval of the article: D.C. Aron, P.R. Conlin, L. Pogach.

×
FULL TEXT
Editors' Note: This commentary was selected for publication from among several submitted in response to a call for readers' perspectives on treatment targets for type 2 diabetes.
The 2007 American College of Physicians guidance statement for type 2 diabetes recommended that “[t]reatment goals should be based on a discussion of the benefits and harms of specific levels of glycemic control with the patient. A hemoglobin A1c level less than 7% based on individualized assessment is a reasonable goal for many but not all patients” (1). At that time, recommended general target levels for hemoglobin A1c ranged from less than 6.5% (American College of Clinical Endocrinologists) to less than 7% (American Diabetes Association) and stratified target levels from less than 7% to less than 9% (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense).
Despite 10 years of iterations of these and other guidelines, recommendations remain heterogeneous (2). However, a public—and sometimes acrimonious—debate is now ongoing and is frequently documented in medical journals and the national press (3). The same body of evidence is considered by all, but the interpretation of that evidence differs among organizations that develop their own guidelines using varying criteria. This leads to conflicting presentations of the evidence to the public and further confusion among practitioners and patients alike. Rather than speculating about why interpretations differ, we propose action to address the conflict. Specifically, we recommend developing a collaboration among federal agencies, the private sector, and academia that focuses...
FULL TEXT
PDF
Not Available
Citations
Citation

Aron DC, Conlin PR, Pogach L. Brief Commentary: The Glycemic Target Guideline Controversy: Same Evidence, Different Perspectives, and a Proposal for Common Ground. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169:248–249. [Epub ahead of print 26 June 2018]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-1342

Download citation file:

© 2020

×
Permissions

Published: Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(4):248-249.

DOI: 10.7326/M18-1342

Published at www.annals.org on 26 June 2018

0 Citations

Related Articles
Effects of Aerobic Training, Resistance Training, or Both on Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Trial
Annals of Internal Medicine; 147 (6): 357-369
Glycemic Control and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Optimal Hemoglobin A1c Targets. A Guidance Statement from the American College of Physicians
Annals of Internal Medicine; 147 (6): 417-422
Nurse Case Management To Improve Glycemic Control in Diabetic Patients in a Health Maintenance Organization: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
Annals of Internal Medicine; 129 (8): 605-612
Effect of Antihyperglycemic Agents Added to Metformin and a Sulfonylurea on Glycemic Control and Weight Gain in Type 2 Diabetes: A Network Meta-analysis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 154 (10): 672-679
View MoreView Less

Journal Club
Protocol-based nurse management of type 2 diabetes did not differ from usual GP care for HbA1c levels
Annals of Internal Medicine; 155 (6): JC3-7
Review: In adult outpatients, nurse-managed protocols improve hemoglobin A1c levels and blood pressure
Annals of Internal Medicine; 161 (12): JC6
Review: Continuous glucose monitoring reduces HbA1c more than self-monitoring in type 1 diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 158 (6): JC9
Review: Sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduce HbA1c and weight but increase infections
Annals of Internal Medicine; 160 (2): JC10
View MoreView Less

Related Point of Care
Type 2 Diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 171 (9): ITC65-ITC80
Type 2 Diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 162 (5): ITC1
Type 2 Diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 152 (5): ITC3-1
Type 2 Diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 146 (1): ITC1-1
View MoreView Less

Related Topics
Cardiology
Coronary Risk Factors
Diabetes
Endocrine and Metabolism

Cardiology, Coronary Risk Factors, Diabetes, Endocrine and Metabolism.

PubMed Articles
High serum concentration of selenium, but not calcium, cobalt, copper, iron, and magnesium, increased the risk of both hyperglycemia and dyslipidemia in adults: A health examination center based cross-sectional study.
J Trace Elem Med Biol 2020;
A negative energy balance during the peri-implantational period reduces dam IGF-1 but does not alter progesterone or pregnancy-specific protein B (PSPB) or fertility in suckled cows.
Domest Anim Endocrinol 2019;
View More

Results provided by: PubMed

CONTINUE WITH LIMITED ACCESS
Annals of Internal Medicine
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
acp link acp
silverchair link silverchair

Copyright © 2020 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704

Privacy Policy

|

Conditions of Use

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
×

You need a subscription to this content to use this feature.

×
PDF Downloads Require Access to the Full Article.
Annals of Internal Medicine
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
Access to this Free Content Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In. Please Choose One of the Following Options
Annals of Internal Medicine
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×