ArticleCardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports2025
Missed opportunities in diabetes care: unraveling therapeutic inertia and its predictors in resource-limited settings.
Article in Cardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTherapeutic inertia the failure to intensify treatment despite persistent hyperglycemia is a major barrier to optimal management of type 2 diabetes, particularly in low-resource settings.
methodsA hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted from June 1, 2024, to August 30, 2024. A total of 299 systematically selected patients were included. Data were collected via structured questionnaires and patient medical records. Bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with therapeutic inertia. Variables with a p value < 0.25 in the bivariable analysis were included in the multivariable model, and those with a p value < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
resultsOverall, 67.2% of patients experienced therapeutic inertia. Multivariable analysis identified four independent predictors: lack of health insurance reduced the likelihood of treatment intensification (AOR = 0.177; 95% CI: 0.054-0.576; p = 0.004); management by general practitioners doubled the odds of inertia compared with specialist care (AOR = 2.002; 95% CI: 1.017-3.939; p = 0.045); higher baseline fasting plasma glucose was associated with increased odds of inertia (AOR = 1.008; 95% CI: 1.003-1.013; p = 0.003); and limited availability of point-of-care HbA1c testing substantially increased the risk of inertia (AOR = 8.423; 95% CI: 1.889-37.561; p = 0.005).
conclusionTherapeutic inertia is highly prevalent, affecting 67.2% of ambulatory patients with type 2 diabetes at NEMMCSH. This study highlights critical barriers at patient, provider, and system levels. Interventions such as expanding insurance coverage, enhancing provider training and decision support, implementing prompts for elevated glycemia, and integrating point-of-care HbA1c testing are urgently needed to reduce therapeutic inertia and improve glycemic control in resource-constrained settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.