It is well recognised that Asia is at the epicenter of the global type 2 diabetes epidemic. Driven by socioeconomic changes involving industrialization, urbanization and adoption of Western lifestyles, the unprecedented increases in the prevalence of diabetes are particularly evident in Southeast Asia. The impact of diabetes is immense, and despite evidence of the benefit of optimal glucose control in reducing the risk of disease progression and development of macrovascular and microvascular complications, many individuals in this region remain poorly controlled. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an increasingly common diabetes-associated complication in Asian patients. Furthermore, Southeast Asia has one of the highest rates of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the world. Consequently, CKD in diabetes is associated with considerable morbidity and cardiovascular-related mortality, highlighting the need to screen and assess patients early in the course of the disease. The management of type 2 diabetes patients with declining renal function represents a significant challenge. Many of the older antidiabetic agents, such as metformin and sulfonylureas, are limited in their utility in CKD as a result of contraindications or hypoglycemic episodes. In contrast, dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors have provided a welcome addition to the therapeutic armamentarium for achieving glycemic control in these special populations. With comparable efficacy to and more favorable pharmacokinetic and side-effect profiles than traditional therapies, agents in this drug class, such as linagliptin, offer a more tailored approach to disease control in type 2 diabetes patients with declining renal function.
There are no data on physician-patient communication in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN) in the Asia-Pacific region. The objective of this study was to examine patient and physician perceptions of pDPN and clinical practice behaviors in five countries in South-East Asia. Primary care physicians and practitioners, endocrinologists, diabetologists, and patients with pDPN completed separate surveys on pDPN diagnosis, impact, management, and physician-patient interactions in Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Thailand. Data were obtained from 100 physicians and 100 patients in each country. The majority of physicians (range across countries, 30-85%) were primary care physicians and practitioners. Patients were mostly aged 18-55 years and had been diagnosed with diabetes for >5 years. Physicians believed pDPN had a greater impact on quality of life than did patients (ranges 83-92% and 39-72%, respectively), but patients believed pDPN had a greater impact on items such as sleep, anxiety, depression, and work than physicians. Physicians considered the diagnosis and treatment of pDPN a low priority, which may be reflected in the generally low incidence of screening (range 12-65%) and a lack of awareness of pDPN. Barriers to treatment included patients' lack of awareness of pDPN. Both physicians and patients agreed that pain scales and local language descriptions were the most useful tools in helping to describe patients' pain. Most patients were monitored upon diagnosis of pDPN (range 55-97%), but patients reported a shorter duration of monitoring compared with physicians. Both physicians and patients agreed that it was patients who initiated conversations on pDPN. Physicians most commonly referred to guidelines from the American Diabetes Association or local guidelines for the management of pDPN. This study highlights important differences between physician and patient perceptions of pDPN, which may impact on its diagnosis and treatment. For a chronic and debilitating complication like pDPN, the physician-patient dialogue is central to maximizing patient outcomes. Strategies, including education of both groups, need to be developed to improve communication.