Please complete attached SOAP NOTE  with attached case summary. 

Name: Hyunsoo Ellis Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on 6430-WEEK 2 SOAP NOTE Just from $13/Page Order Essay	Pt. Encounter Number
Date:	Age: 45 years	Sex: Male
SUBJECTIVE
CC: The patient has an acute lower back pain
HPI The patient reports low back pain which begun three weeks ago, he started experiencing pain at night, fever, and unexplained weight loss. The pain begun at the lower back, the pain aggravates while sitting than when in motion and it is dominant during the day than at night while sleeping. Pain alleviate when the patient used painkillers and when he is standing or lying. The patient has no record of recent illness, the patient works in an office; he does not have history of previous back injury or back surgery.
Medication: Aspirin muscle relaxants
Allergies: Coldness, dust Medication intolerance: none Major illness/Major traumas: none Hospitalization/Surgery: Patient has knee surgery due to accident The patient reports no cases of diabetes, HTN, Peptic ulcer, asthma, lung disease, heart disease cancer, and TB and kidney problems. He has had typhoid problems and no psychiatric diagnosis
Family History: The patient reports that there is no one in his family who has been diagnosed with any medical or psychiatric disease. However, his father was diagnosed with lung disease ten years ago and his mother has been suffering from TB for a long time.
Social History: The patient has MBA degree; he works as a business manager in a production firm and lives with his wife and two children. The patient takes alcohol, he does not engage in extra marital activities, does not engage in any dangerous activities such as biking, and sky diving and skating.
ROS
General: The patient has lost weight, reports fatigue mainly after work, fever and night sweats.	Cardiovascular: The patient reports no chest pain, the heart rate is normal (no palpitations), He experiences PND but not frequently and no signs of edema
Skin The patient does not have rashes, bleeding or any skin discoloration. The patient has few changes in lesions and moles.	Respiratory The patient does not cough but sneezes at night and very early in the morning, he has no record of TH but received treatment of pneumonia some years back
Eyes The patient has clear visualization and does not experience visual changes of any kind. His corrective lenses are good.	Gastrointestinal The patient experiences abdominal pains occasionally and has cases of constipation. The patient has no history on hemorrhoids and hepatitis, he has no eating disorders and does not have black or tarry stool.
Ears The patient has healthy ears with no pain, no hearing loss and he does not experience any ringing in ears or discharge.	Gynecological The patient experiences frequent urgency to urinate with urine changing color periodically, the patient does not use any contraception (wife does), has one sexual partner, no STDs
Mouth/Nose/Throat The patient does not have any sinus problem, no dysphagia, experiences nose bleeds (occasionally), has tooth cavity, no hoarseness and throat pain	Musculoskeletal The patient experience back pain, has no joint swelling, he experiences stiffness and pain in the neck, has no fractured hx and no osteoporosis
Breast There are no changes in the patient’s breast	Neurological The patient has no prior cases of syncope, no seizures, no record of transient paralysis, experiences weakness sometimes, and does not experience incidences of black-out
Heme/Lymph/Endo Patient HIV status is negative, he has no bruises, no blood transfusion record, experiences night sweats, has no swollen glands, he reports reduced thirst. The patient has increased hunger and cold intolerance (sneezes in coldness)	Psychiatric The patient has suffered depression in the past, has not anxiety disorder, experiences sleeping difficulties, has never had suicidal ideation/attempt and no previous hx
OBJECTIVE
Weight 68.7 kg BMI 23.77	Temp 97.8 °F	BP 148/84 (seated, right arm)
Height 1.70 m	Pulse 60 regular and rhythm	Resp 12
General appearance The patient appears healthy with no distress. He is alert and oriented, keen and answers questions appropriately. The patient looked moody at first but later jovial.
Skin The skin is brown, hairy, dry and clean. The patient has no rashes or lesions visible
HEENT The head is normocephalic and atraumatic, the patient is baldheaded no depressions, the visual acuity is intact, EOM are intact, PEARLA, no nystagmus. Ears are pinna, tragus and earn canal is tender. The tympanic membrane is normal. The nasal mucosa is pink and moist, the nasal septum of the patient is midline and the tongue is normal, no buccal nodules, pharynx is normal. The patient shows no adenopathy
Cardiovascular Normal S1 and S2 with regular rate and rhythm. There are no extra sounds or murmurs, capillary refill two secs, 3 and pulse throughout. No presence of edema
Respiratory The patient has chest symmetric wall, has a regular respiration, the lungs are clear to auscultation bilaterally
Gastrointestinal Shape of the abdomen rounded, smooth with no lesions, distention moderate, the stomach has visible peristalsis
Breast There is no discoloration of the skin around the breast
Genitourinary Male: Both testes are palpable, no masses or lesions, no hernia, and no urethral discharge. Rectal as appropriate: No evidence of hemorrhoids, fissures, bleeding, or masses—Males: Prostrate is smooth, non-tender, and free from nodules, is of normal size, and sphincter tone is firm.
Musculoskeletal The patients shows full range of movement as he moves around the room during examination.
Neurological The patient’s speech is clear, the tone is normal and his posture is erect. The patient is balanced, stable and gait is normal
Psychiatric The patient is alert and oriented, dress in clean slacks and white shirt and a coat. The patient maintains eye contact, his responses are soft and clear and he answers questions appropriately.
Lab tests Urinalysis- pending Urine culture-pending Wet prep- pending
Special tests
Diagnosis
PLAN including education · Include at least three differential tests · Final Diagnosis · Evidence for final diagnosis should be documented in your subjective and objective exams. Plan · Further testing · Medication · Education · Non medication treatment · Follow up

Family Medicine 06: 57-year-old female diabetes care visit

User: YULAK LANDA
Email: landayrn17@stu.southuniversity.edu
Date: February 6, 2021 12:59AM

Learning Objectives

The student should be able to:

Incorporate appropriate psychosocial, cultural, health literacy, and family data into the management plan of a patient with type
2 diabetes.
Apply evidence-based standards of care to the diagnosis, monitoring, and management of a patient with type 2 diabetes
mellitus.
Describe the barriers to coordination of diabetes care and systemwide improvements that could improve coordination of
diabetes care.
Describe the importance of an interprofessional team approach to the care of patients with diabetes.
Describe the utility of the electronic medical record in the care of your practice population and in the reporting of quality
measures.
Educate a patient about type 2 diabetes with attention to and respect for the patient’s own disease model.

Knowledge

Comprehensive Annual Diabetes Visit

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) provides standards of care for diabetes management that are updated annually and can
be downloaded to a smartphone.
Clinician tasks for diabetes care:

Confirm the diagnosis and classify diabetes.
Evaluate for diabetes complications and potential comorbid conditions.
Review previous treatment and risk factor control in patients with established diabetes.
Begin patient engagement in the formulation of a care-management plan.
Develop a plan for continuing care.

See the American Diabetes Association’s “Components of the Comprehensive diabetes medical evaluation at initial, follow-up, and
annual visits”: Part 1 ( ) | Part 2 ( )

Electronic Medical Record

An electronic medical record system:

Offers templates that increase the likelihood that patients will receive the recommended care.
May improve the quality of care in primary care settings.
Provides tools to evaluate patient care across an entire population.
Allows documentation of improved physician performance, which may increase reimbursements by some insurers.
Has been shown to interrupt the clinician-patient relationship—particularly via “screen gaze.”

Pathophysiology of Diabetes

Type 1 diabetes mellitus

The pancreas is damaged through autoimmune inflammation leading to destruction of the beta cells. The loss of beta cells leads to
the complete inability to produce insulin, (immunologic etiology).
Type 2 diabetes mellitus

The body is unable to recognize the insulin produced by the pancreas and use it properly (insulin resistance). Increased beta cell
insulin secretion may initially compensate, but over time beta cells fail.
Chronic complications

Both types of diabetes can cause the same end-organ damage. High blood glucose eventually affects blood vessels and therefore
organs throughout the entire body. The heart, brain, kidneys, eyes, and the nerves that control sensation and autonomic function
are affected.
Remember: High blood pressure, which many patients with diabetes have, makes the vascular disease much worse.

© 2021 Aquifer 1/12

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S1

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/42/Supplement_1/S34/F2/graphic-2.large

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/42/Supplement_1/S34/F2/graphic-3.large

Diabetes: Common Manifestations of End-Organ Damage

Cardiovascular disease, including coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral arterial disease

People with diabetes are two to four times more likely to have heart disease or stroke than people without diabetes. Patients with
diabetes who have a myocardial infarction have worse outcomes than patients without diabetes, and a diagnosis of diabetes is
considered equivalent in risk to having had a previous myocardial infarction. Management of cardiovascular risk factors so
commonly found in diabetes is therefore essential in preventing morbidity and mortality in these patients.
The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association ASCVD risk calculator (Risk Estimator Plus) is generally a useful
tool to estimate 10-year ASCVD risk. These calculators include diabetes as a risk factor, since diabetes itself confers increased risk
for ASCVD, although it should be acknowledged that these risk calculators do not account for the duration of diabetes or the
presence of diabetes complications, such as albuminuria.
Retinopathy

Diabetes is the most common cause of new cases of blindness among adults aged 18-64 years. Five years after diagnosis of type
2 diabetes, patients with more severe or uncontrolled disease that requires insulin have a 40% prevalence of retinopathy while
those on oral hypoglycemic agents have a 24% prevalence. After 15 years of diabetes, almost all patients with type 1 diabetes and
two-thirds of patients with type 2 diabetes have background retinopathy. By the time the patient’s vision is affected, substantial
retinal damage may have already occurred. Proliferative retinopathy is prevalent in 25% of patients with 25 or more years of
diabetes. In addition to optimizing glycemic control, optimizing blood pressure and serum lipid control can also slow the
progression of diabetic retinopathy.
Neuropathy

Neuropathy is a heterogeneous condition that is associated with nerve pathology. The condition is classified according to the
nerves affected. The classification of neuropathy includes focal, diffuse, sensory, motor, and autonomic neuropathy. The
prevalence of neuropathy defined by loss of ankle jerk reflexes is 7% at 1 year, increasing to 50% at 25 years, for both type 1 and
type 2 diabetes.
Nephropathy

Nephropathy is common in diabetes: 20-40% of people with diabetes develop diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes was listed as the
primary cause of kidney failure in 44% of all new cases in 2014.

Acute Diabetic Decompensations (DKA and HHS)

Type 1 diabetes

In patients with type 1 diabetes, without sufficient insulin, blood sugar runs high, and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) can develop.
Type 2 diabetes

Patients with type 2 diabetes with hyperglycemia more often develop hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS).
Typically it is the patient with type 1 diabetes who is most at risk for developing DKA; however, patients with type 2 diabetes
can also develop DKA. This happens because, over time, type 2 diabetes starts to resemble type 1 diabetes as pancreatic
function dwindles and patients with type 2 diabetes may begin to require insulin. If insulin deficiency is severe enough, a patient
with type 2 diabetes may produce ketones and develop hyperglycemia. For example, an older adult patient with longstanding type
2 diabetes who becomes acutely ill with pneumonia could easily develop DKA.

Screening Recommendations for Type 2 Diabetes

American Diabetes Association recommendations

1. Testing should be considered in overweight or obese (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 or ≥ 23 kg/m2 in Asian Americans*) adults who have one
or more of the following risk factors:

First-degree relative with diabetes
High-risk race/ethnicity** (e.g., African American, Latino, Native American, Asian American, Pacific Islander)
History of CVD
Hypertension (≥ 140/90 mmHg or on therapy for hypertension)
HDL cholesterol level < 35 mg/dL (0.90 mmol/L) and/or a triglyceride level > 250 mg/dL (2.82 mmol/L)
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome
Physical inactivity
Other clinical conditions associated with insulin resistance (e.g., severe obesity, acanthosis nigricans)

2. Patients with prediabetes (A1C ≥ 5.7%, impaired glucose tolerance (two-hour plasma glucose > 140 mg/dL following a 75 gram
glucose load) should be tested yearly.
3. Women who were diagnosed with GDM should have lifelong testing at least every three years.
4. For all other patients, testing should begin at age 45.
5. If results are normal, testing should be repeated at a minimum of three-year intervals, with consideration of more frequent
testing depending on initial results and risk status.
* This lower BMI cut off is due to the difference in distribution of fat. Asian Americans tend to exhibit more visceral than peripheral
fat, which is more closely associated with insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes.

© 2021 Aquifer 2/12

http://tools.acc.org/ASCVD-Risk-Estimator-Plus

**^ The American Diabetes Association recommends screening in these groups because they are disproportionately affected by
type 2 diabetes. It is important to keep in mind that race/ethnicity alone does not cause diabetes, and clinicians should address
the modifiable social and structural factors that contribute to these disparities.
United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Recommendations

For adults aged 40 to 70 years who are overweight or obese, screen for abnormal blood glucose as part of cardiovascular
risk assessment. Clinicians should offer or refer patients with abnormal blood glucose to intensive behavioral counseling
interventions to promote a healthful diet and physical activity. Rating: grade B recommendation.
For obese or overweight adults under age 40 who have additional risk factors (e.g., family history of diabetes, history of
gestational diabetes), it may be reasonable to start screening before age 40.

Diagnostic Criteria for Diabetes Mellitus

1. A random glucose of 200 mg/dL or above, plus symptoms of hyperglycemia, such as polyuria or unexplained weight loss, or
hyperglycemic crisis.

2. A fasting plasma glucose of greater than or equal to 126 mg/dL. Fasting is defined as no caloric intake for at least eight
hours.

3. A hemoglobin A1C greater than or equal to 6.5%.
4. Two-hour plasma glucose ≥ 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L) during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

The diagnosis requires two abnormal test results from the same sample or in two separate test samples unless there is a clear
clinical diagnosis (e.g., patient in a hyperglycemic crisis or with classic symptoms of hyperglycemia and a random plasma glucose
≥ 200 mg/dL).

Who Gets Diabetes?

Prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes in the United States, all ages, 2018:

Total: 34.2 million people (10.5% of the population) have diabetes
Diagnosed: 26.9 million people
Undiagnosed: 7.3 million people (21.4% of the total number of Americans with diabetes)

Prevalence of diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed) among people aged 18 years or older, United States, 2018:

Age 18 years or older: 34.1 million, 13% of all people in this age group have diabetes.
Age 65 years or older: 14.3 million, 26.8% of all people in this age group have diabetes.

After adjusting for population age differences, 2017-2018 national survey data for U.S. adults aged 18 years or older indicate that
the following percentages have diagnosed diabetes:

7.5% of non-Hispanic Whites
9.2% of Asian Americans
12.5% of Hispanics
11.7% of non-Hispanic Blacks
14.7% of American Indians/Alaska natives

Prediabetes

In 2018 prediabetes affected roughly 88 million adults in the U.S. Prediabetes is defined as the presence of either impaired fasting
glucose-IFG (fasting glucose 100—125 mg/dl) or impaired glucose tolerance-IGT (2 hr values of oral glucose tolerance testing 140
—199 mg/dl). New evidence shows that damage to end-organs is already occurring during prediabetes and that progression to
diabetes can be delayed or prevented with lifestyle modification and to a lesser degree with medication.
The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) was a randomized, five-year study to evaluate intensive lifestyle modification (education,
coaching in diet and exercise, etc.) versus diet/exercise information along with 850 mg of metformin twice a day. The study
population included 3,200 participants with impaired glucose tolerance. Intensive lifestyle modification produced a 58% reduction
in risk for type 2 diabetes or a delay of about 11 years. The metformin group showed a less impressive 31% risk reduction.

Diabetic Retinopathy

The most frequent cause of new blindness among adults (aged 20—74 years). Laser photocoagulation treatment can slow the
progression of retinopathy and reduce vision loss, but it doesn’t restore lost vision. Since the treatment is aimed at preventing
vision loss, and retinopathy is asymptomatic for its initial course, it’s important to identify and treat patients early in the course of
the disease.
In severe, non-proliferative retinopathy, look for the following findings on a fundoscopic exam:

Retinal hemorrhages are dark blots with indistinct borders that indicate partial obstruction and infarction.
Cotton wool spots are white spots with fuzzy borders and they indicate areas of previous infarction. They accompany
hemorrhages.
Microaneurysms are more punctate dark lesions that indicate vascular dilatation.

Neovascularization is the hallmark of proliferative retinopathy. The growth of new blood vessels is prompted by retinal vessel
occlusion and hypoxia.

© 2021 Aquifer 3/12

http://retinagallery.com/thumbnails.php?album=685

Diabetes Education: Blood Glucose

Optimal range for blood glucose:

Fasting blood glucose should be 80—120 mg/dl
Postprandial blood glucose between one to two hours after a meal should be < 180 mg/dl

Conditions that contribute to hyperglycemia:

Overeating, missing doses of medication, dehydration, infection and illness, and stress.

Clinical Skills

Understanding the Patient’s Experience of His or Her Illness

Often in practice, clinicians use one-way communication to describe the biomedical explanation for the disease and the
recommended treatment. The LEARN model, developed by Berlin and Fowkes, is a simple way to remember the importance of
two-way dialogue with your patient about their understanding of their own disease.

Listen with empathy and understanding to the patient’s perception of the problem.
Explain your perceptions of the problem and your strategy for treatment.
Acknowledge and discuss the differences and similarities between these perceptions.
Recommended treatment while remembering the patient’s cultural parameters.
Negotiate an agreement. It is important to understand the patient’s explanatory model so that medical treatment fits in
their cultural framework.

Think Cultural Health offers a Guide to Providing Effective Communication and Language Assistance Services. This is a tool from
the Office of Minority Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services designed to help facilitate communication with
patients from various cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

Annual Foot Exam for Patients with Diabetes

The American Diabetes Association recommends that all patients with diabetes have an annual foot exam and provides standard
of care guidelines for this exam, including testing for neuropathy.
Foot ulceration is the result of impaired sensation (distal symmetric polyneuropathy) and impaired perfusion (diabetes
vasculopathy and peripheral vascular disease), both of which are independent, strong risk factors for foot ulceration and
amputation.
The early recognition and appropriate management of neuropathy in the patient with diabetes is important because:

1. Up to 50% of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) may be asymptomatic but leave patients at risk of foot ulceration.
2. Nondiabetic neuropathies may be present in patients with diabetes and may be treatable.
3. While specific treatment for the underlying nerve damage is currently not available—other than improved glycemic control,

which may slow progression but not reverse neuronal loss—effective symptomatic treatments are available for some
manifestations of DPN.

The foot exam should include:

Testing for loss of protective sensation

Sensory testing, according to the ADA, should be conducted with a 10-gram monofilament PLUS any one of the following:
1. Vibration using a 128-Hz tuning fork
2. Pinprick sensation
3. Ankle reflexes (Achilles necessary but patellar not needed)

Assessment of pedal pulses (dorsalis pedis and posterior tibial arteries). Assessing the arterial supply to the lower limbs
and feet is essential in evaluation for peripheral vascular disease, the strongest risk factor for delayed ulcer healing and
amputation in diabetes patients.
Inspection: Skin changes such as hair loss and temperature changes may signal vascular insufficiency. Since foot
ulceration is usually caused by breaks in the skin due to accidental trauma or poorly fitted footwear, at each visit the
patient’s feet should be inspected for breaks in the skin, pressure calluses that precede ulceration, existing ulceration, and
infection, and bony abnormalities that lead to abnormal pressure distribution and ulceration. The patient’s footwear should
also be inspected for abnormal patterns of wear and appropriate sizing.

Monofilament Testing for Patients with Diabetes

Video on Monofilament Sensory Testing

How to Request a Referral

Include pertinent patient information and a clear request or question to be addressed by the consultant. Sending a patient
summary that includes the past medical history, medication list, allergies, and insurance information is very helpful. If there are
relevant laboratory or imaging results, these should be included or summarized.

© 2021 Aquifer 4/12

https://hclsig.thinkculturalhealth.hhs.gov

Diabetes Education: Conversation Map

Health Interactions Conversation Maps are ADA-approved tools for facilitating diabetes education. Based on adult learning
principles, the maps are designed to engage the group participants in discussion of various aspects of diabetes care (nutrition,
glucose monitoring, exercise, complications, etc). The U.S. Conversation Map tools meet the ADA Recognition criteria from a
complete DSME curriculum.

Management

Management of Specific ASCVD Risk Factors

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or ASCVD (i.e., coronary heart disease and stroke) is the leading cause of death in patients
with diabetes. Patients with diabetes are two to four times more likely to have heart disease or stroke than people without
diabetes. Diabetes patients with myocardial infarction have worse outcomes than patients without diabetes, and a diagnosis of
diabetes is considered equivalent in risk to having had a previous myocardial infarction. Management of cardiovascular risk
factors so commonly found in patients with diabetes is therefore essential in preventing morbidity and mortality in patients with
diabetes.
Management of specific ASCVD risk factors:

Smoking cessation:

Advise all patients not to use cigarettes and other tobacco products (level of evidence A) or e-cigarettes (level of
evidence A).

Include smoking cessation counseling and other forms of treatment as a routine component of diabetes care (level
of evidence A).

Advising all patients to simply cut back on their smoking has not been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes. Strong and
convincing evidence exists for a causal link between cigarette smoking and health risk, making smoking the most important
modifiable cause of premature death. Patients with diabetes who smoke have a higher risk of premature development of
microvascular complications, CVD, and premature death. A number of large randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the
efficacy and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation counseling in changing smoking behavior. Also, there is no evidence that e-
cigarettes are a healthier alternative to smoking or that e-cigarettes can facilitate smoking cessation.
Hypertension:

Lower blood pressure in diabetic patients with stage 1 hypertension > 130/80 mmHg. Clear observational evidence
indicates that lower blood pressures are associated with improved cardiovascular and renal outcomes for patients with diabetes,
and this relationship extends as low as systolic pressures of 115 mmHg. In the meta-analysis produced for the 2017 ACC/AHA
blood pressure guideline, researchers found evidence that treating patients to a blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg helped prevent such outcomes, AND they found similar outcomes for patients with and without diabetes. Thus the 2017 guideline recommends using both behavioral interventions and medications to lower blood pressures in adults with diabetes to below a goal of 130/80 mmHg. They specifically mention that physicians may choose any of the four classes of medications for patients with diabetes: thiazides, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or calcium channel blockers. For more required information about hypertension management in patients with diabetes, read the Aquifer Hypertension Guidelines Module . Dyslipidemia:

Dyslipidemia is a known risk factor for CVD in diabetic and non-diabetic populations. Abundant evidence supports the use of
statins in the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes. Measurement of fasting lipids is
recommended at the time of diagnosis of diabetes and annually for patients on statins.
The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommends the following blood cholesterol
treatment for patients with diabetes and LDL-c 70—189 mg/dL:

Moderate-intensity statin therapy should be initiated or continued for adults 40 to 75 years of age with diabetes mellitus
(level of evidence A).
High-intensity statin therapy is reasonable for adults 40 to 75 years of age with diabetes mellitus with a ≥ 7.5% estimated
10-year ASCVD risk unless contraindicated (level of evidence B).
In adults with diabetes mellitus who are younger than 40 or older than 75 years of age, it is reasonable to evaluate the
potential for ASCVD benefits and for adverse effects, for drug-drug interactions, and to consider patient preferences when
deciding to initiate, continue, or intensify statin therapy (level of evidence C). Note, the ACC/AHA recommends all patients
older than 21 (with or without diabetes) who have an LDL-c > 190 should be started on statin therapy (level of evidence
B).

For more required information about cholesterol management in patients with diabetes, read the Aquifer Cholesterol
Guidelines Module.

Lifestyle modification—weight loss, increase exercise, decrease fat intake (level of evidence A).

Aspirin:

Aspirin is effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with previous MI or stroke (secondary
prevention). For patients with no previous cardiovascular events (primary prevention), the net benefit is not as evident.
Aspirin therapy for primary prevention can be discussed with a patient through a process of shared decision-making, weighing the
potential cardiovascular benefits with the risk of bleeding. Recommendations for using aspirin as primary prevention include men
and women aged ≥ 50 years with diabetes and at least one additional major risk factor: family history of premature ASCVD,

© 2021 Aquifer 5/12

http://healthyinteractions.com/conversation-map-tools

file:///documents/796

file:///documents/796

hypertension, dyslipidemia, smoking, or chronic kidney disease/albuminuria and who are not at increased risk of bleeding. For
patients over the age of 70 years (with or without diabetes), the use of aspirin may have greater risk than benefit.
The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends:

Aspirin therapy (75 to 162 mg/day) may be considered as a primary prevention strategy in those with diabetes who are at
increased cardiovascular risk, after a discussion with the patient on the benefits versus increased risk of bleeding (level of
evidence A).
Use aspirin therapy (75 to 162 mg/day) as a secondary prevention strategy in those with diabetes and a history of
atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (level of evidence A).
For patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and documented aspirin allergy, clopidogrel (75 mg/day) should be
used (level of evidence B).
Dual antiplatelet therapy (with low-dose aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor) is reasonable for a year after an acute coronary
syndrome (level of evidence A) and may have benefits beyond this period (level of evidence B).

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends:
Adults aged 50 to 59 years with a ≥ 10% 10-year CVD risk:

The USPSTF recommends initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and
colorectal cancer (CRC) in adults aged 50 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk, are not at increased risk
for bleeding, have a life expectancy of at least 10 years, and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily for at least 10 years
(level of evidence B).

Adults aged 60 to 69 years with a ≥ 10% 10-year CVD risk:
The decision to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD and CRC in adults aged 60 to 69 years who
have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk should be an individual one. Persons who are not at increased risk for bleeding, have
a life expectancy of at least 10 years, and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily for at least 10 years are more likely to
benefit. Persons who place a higher value on the potential benefits than the potential harms may choose to initiate low-dose
aspirin (level of evidence C).

The commonly prescribed dose in the U.S. is 81 mg daily.
Glycemic control:

Lowering patients’ A1Cs to < 7% has been shown conclusively to prevent microvascular disease (retinopathy and nephropathy). Whether this glycemic control prevents macrovascular disease has been less clear. A recent meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials of intensive (A1C of 6–6.5) versus standard (A1C of 7%) glycemic control showed a significant reduction in CVD outcomes (fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction) but very importantly failed to show a decrease in stroke or all-cause mortality. A recent randomized trial of intensive glycemic control found no benefit for preventing CVD over five years, but disturbingly found an increase in all-cause mortality. This isolated finding warrants further study, but the current ADA guidelines recommend that the A1C goal is still close to or less than 7% and that treatment should be tailored to the patient to avoid hypoglycemia and weight gain. More or less stringent targets may be appropriate for individual patients if achieved without significant hypoglycemia or adverse events. Additionally, other organizations may interpret the evidence differently, and recommend higher or lower A1C goals. For example, the American College of Physicians (ACP) recommends aiming to achieve an A1C between 7% and 8%.

​Using the Pooled Cohort Equations risk calculator, you estimate Ms. Sanchez’s ten-year ASCVD risk at 15.2%.
Aspirin therapy should be considered for primary prevention in patients with diabetes with a 10-year risk > 10%, which
includes females with diabetes 50 years of age or older who have at least one additional major risk factor. Her additional
risk factor would be elevated blood pressure (hypertension). You would need to discuss a risk of bleeding, and have a
discussion of the benefits and risks with the patient.

ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

The American Diabetes Association recommends a patient-centered approach to choosing appropriate pharmacologic treatment of
blood glucose. This includes consideration of key factors:
1) Important comorbidities such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and heart failure
(HF)
2) Hypoglycemia risk
3) Effects on body weight
4) Side effects
5) Cost
6) Patient preferences
Lifestyle modifications that improve health should be emphasized along with any pharmacologic therapy. Due to recent evidence
in support of some of the newer agents for diabetes, the ADA recently changed its algorithm for medication management for this
important disease. While metformin remains the first-line therapy in addition to lifestyle changes, this new algorithm highlights the
importance of recognizing patient comorbidities, such as ASCVD or CKD. For patients with established ASCVD or major ASCVD risk
factors, a GLP-1 receptor agonist or a SGLT2 inhibitor is preferred based on cardiovascular risk reduction. For patients with heart
failure (particularly LVEF <45%) or CKD, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended with evidence of reducing HF and CKD progression. For patients without established ASCVD or CKD, the choice of a second agent to add to metformin is not as evidence-based. Rather, it is based on avoidance of side effects, particularly hypoglycemia and weight gain, cost, and patient preferences.

© 2021 Aquifer 6/12

Recent evidence supports the use of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes who need greater glucose lowering
than can be obtained with oral agents. Most GLP-1 RA products are injectable, but there is an oral formulation of semaglutide now
available. Trials comparing the addition of an injectable GLP-1 RA or insulin in patients needing further glucose lowering show a
similar efficacy between the two treatments. But, GLP-1 RAs in these trials had a decreased risk of hypoglycemia and greater
benefit on body weight compared with insulin, although they did have more gastrointestinal side effects. Therefore, in patients
with type 2 diabetes who need greater glucose lowering than can be obtained with oral agents, GLP-1 RAs are preferred to insulin
when possible (level of evidence B). Still, one must consider the high costs and side effect profile as potential barriers to the use of
GLP-1 RAs.
Table: available agents for type 2 diabetes management.

Monotherapy:
Dual Therapy:
Metformin +
One of These

Metformin Sulfonylurea Thiazolidinedione DPP-4Inhibitor
SGLT2
Inhibitor

GLP-1
Agonist Insulin

Mechanism Activates AMP-Kinase
Stimulates insulin
secretion

Activates nuclear
transcription factor

Inhibits DPP-4,
increases
incretin
secretion

Inhibits
SGLT2 in the
kidney

Activates GLP-
1 receptors,
mimics incretin

Overcomes
insulin
resistance

Examples Metformin Glipizide,glimepiride
Pioglitazone,
rosiglitazone

Sitagliptin,
saxagliptin

Canagliflozin,
empagliflozin

Exenatide,
liraglutide

Glargine,
lispro

A1C
Reduction 1% to 2% 1% to 2% 1% to 2% 0.5% to 1% 0.5% to 1% 1% to 2% > 2%

Weight
Effect

Neutral or
reduction Gain Gain Neutral Reduction Reduction Gain

Side Effects GI; Lacticacidosis

Hypoglycemia

Heart failure;
edema Rare

GU
symptoms,
dehydration

GI,
pancreatitis,
medullary
thyroid cancer

Hypoglycemia

Evidence of
CVD
reduction

Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No

Costs Low Low Low High High High Intermediate

Barriers to Initiation of Injectable Therapy

Mindset that injectable therapy is a medication of last resort and that initiating insulin equals failure.

This is not true. Remember that good glucose control is more important than the means used to achieve it.
Patient fear of injecting medication with a needle.

Most patients with diabetes are surprised at how easy administering injectable therapy is, and often share that it is less painful
than fingerstick glucose monitoring.
Physical limitations regarding drawing up injectable therapy.

Presents an impediment for some patients due to poor vision or poor dexterity; pens make it easy to “draw up” the correct amount
of medication.
Patient’s perception that insulin or other injectable medications actually cause the comorbidities associated with
diabetes.

Many patients have family members or friends with diabetes who were placed on insulin late in the progression of their disease.
When complications occurred, the insulin was blamed for the poor outcomes.
Physicians may lack the time and support staff to teach patients.

Patients need to be educated about administering, storing, and dosing injectable medications, and monitoring blood glucose.

Vaccines Recommended for Patients with Diabetes

Influenza vaccine should be provided to patients with diabetes annually.

© 2021 Aquifer 7/12

Pneumococcal 23-valent polysaccharide (Pneumovax) should be provided to all adults with diabetes. At age 65 (or
older), a patient will need a second dose of Pneumovax, provided at least five years have passed since the first dose.
Hepatitis B vaccine should be administered to all unvaccinated adults with diabetes. There is evidence that patients with
diabetes are at increased risk for developing hepatitis B, perhaps due to the frequent use of needles for injectable
medications and glucometers.

CDC Vaccine Information for Adults: Diabetes Type 1 and Type 2 and Adult Vaccination. 2016.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/adults/rec-vac/health-conditions/diabetes.html. Accessed November 6, 2020.
CDC Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule: For Ages 19 Year or Older. 2020.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/adult/adult-combined-schedule . Accessed November 6, 2020.

Importance of Dental Care for Patients with Diabetes

When diabetes is not controlled properly, high glucose levels in saliva may help bacteria that attack tooth enamel thrive. Going to
the dentist and brushing your teeth helps remove decay-causing plaque, which can result in cavities and gum disease.
It is also important to go to the dentist regularly because gum diseases and fungal infections appear to be more frequent and more
severe due to immunosuppression among people with diabetes.
Additionally, periodontal disease can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Team-Based Care for Patients with Diabetes

People with diabetes should receive medical care from a team which may include nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses,
dietitians, pharmacists, health educators, and mental health professionals. Each patient deserves an individualized plan using
some combination of resources that are appropriate for them.

When to Request an Ophthalmology Referral

Early detection and treatment of diabetic retinopathy can improve outcomes. Yearly dilated ophthalmoscopic exams are needed
because many patients with retinopathy may not notice symptoms. The dilated exam is very sensitive for detecting retinal
thickening from macular edema and for early neovascularization. The use of fundus photography is more sensitive for detecting
retinopathy but is more difficult to obtain because of the need for a trained photographer and reader.
Type 1 diabetes patients should have their first annual eye exam five years after diagnosis. However, type 2 diabetes patients
should have their first dilated exam when they are first diagnosed (evidence level B) because roughly 20% of patients will already
have some degree of retinopathy at diagnosis.
Evidence from two large trials, the Diabetic Retinopathy Study (DRS) and the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study
(ETDRS), demonstrates the value of referring patients for photocoagulation surgery in order to prevent vision loss in diabetes
patients.

Diabetes Education: Daily Foot Care

Inspect, wash, and dry feet daily. Dry well between the toes.
Report injuries, ulcers, blisters, red areas or painful areas to your physician right away.
Apply moisturizer to prevent cracking, dry skin. Do not put lotion between toes.
Always wear socks and close-toed shoes; never go barefoot!
Cut toenails straight across, or have a health care professional cut them for you.
Feel inside your shoes with your hands before putting them on to avoid injury.
Purchase properly-fitted footwear preferably at the end of the day when feet are slightly swollen.

Diabetes Education: Resources to Improve Diet

Many patients with diabetes struggle with knowing what to eat. No “one-size-fits-all” nutrition plan exists, and meal
planning should be individualized. All individuals with diabetes should be referred for individualized medical nutrition
therapy with a registered dietitian/ nutritionist.
See ADA 2020 Guidelines Table 5.1 for specific nutrition recommendations.
The American Diabetes Association website has many resources for patients, including recipes and a tool for meal planning
and researching nutritional information about various foods while creating a shopping list, called Diabetes Food Hub.

Studies

Recommended Diabetes Follow-Up Laboratory Studies

There are four reasons for ordering lab tests at a diabetes follow-up visit: monitoring diabetic control, assessing end-organ
damage, monitoring side effects of treatment, and uncovering management complications.
Diabetic control is monitored via the hemoglobin A1C. The A1C is a measurement of glycosylated hemoglobin and represents

© 2021 Aquifer 8/12

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/adults/rec-vac/health-conditions/diabetes.html

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/adult/adult-combined-schedule

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S48.figures-only

http://tracker.diabetes.org/myfoodadvisor.html

plasma glucose concentrations over a four- to 12-week period of time. Current standards of care recommend initial A1C testing at
diagnosis, and follow-up testing at least two times a year in patients who are stable and meeting the goal of A1C < 7; perform the A1C quarterly in patients when therapy is changing or they are not meeting the goal. Point-of-care testing for A1C provides the opportunity for more timely treatment changes. Measuring a fingerstick of blood sugar is indicated if a patient acutely endorses symptoms of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia at the time of the visit. Otherwise, in the setting of diabetes follow-up care, this one measurement does not provide the useful information about glycemic control that can be obtained from an A1C measurement. Screening for and monitoring diabetic nephropathy is important for assessing end-organ damage. It is recommended at diagnosis and annually according to ADA guidelines. In addition, many diabetes medications are excreted through the kidneys and require annual monitoring to identify renal insufficiency and avoid drug toxicity (e.g., metformin, which can cause metabolic acidosis). 24- hour or timed urine collections are difficult to obtain and add little to the prediction of the accuracy of protein and creatinine measurements. The spot urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio is the screening test for microalbuminuria. In patients with urinary albumin > 30 mg/g creatinine and/or an eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, consider monitoring twice annually. The serum creatinine and calculated GFR are used to monitor or stage chronic kidney disease. Automatic calculators are now available that can directly calculate the GFR. Calculated GFR is obtained using the serum creatinine level. The Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation is the recommended method of calculation according to the National Kidney Disease Education Program. In addition to renal insufficiency, metformin can cause another side effect to take into account when deciding which labs to order. During clinical trials, up to 7% of patients receiving metformin developed asymptomatic subnormal serum vitamin B12 levels. In the setting of neuropathy, too, serum B12 levels would be a very reasonable diagnostic test to order. Consider screening patients with type 1 diabetes for autoimmune thyroid disease and celiac disease soon after diagnosis. In adults not taking statins or other lipid-lowering therapy, it is reasonable to obtain a lipid profile at the time of diabetes diagnosis, at the initial medical evaluation, and every five years thereafter if under the age of 40 years. Also, obtain a lipid profile at the initiation of statins or other lipid-lowering therapy, four to 12 weeks after initiation or a change in dose, and annually thereafter.

Clinical Reasoning

Hyperosmolar Hyperglycemic State (HHS) versus Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA)

Hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS) should not be confused with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), the other severe diabetic
decompensation. Both HHS and DKA are life-threatening conditions that require prompt management.

HHS DKA

Mortality
Increases with increasing age and serum osmolality. The average
mortality rate in many studies is 15% but can be as high as 20-30% in
the presence of significant infection.

Mortality rate is roughly 2% for patients
under 65 years old but as high as 22% for
patients over 65 years old.

Serum
pH

Not a metabolic acidosis. Serum pH is generally > 7.3, with a
bicarbonate > 15 mEq/L (> 15 mmol/L).

Metabolic gap acidosis associated with a pH
< 7.3.

Plasma
glucose Plasma glucose levels are usually > 600 mg/dL. Lower plasma glucose levels, i.e., 250 mg/dL.

Ketones
Ketones are absent or only mildly elevated because type 2 diabetes
patients usually have enough endogenous insulin to suppress or greatly
limit ketogenesis.

Ketosis

Physical findings of HHS:

HHS is characterized by severe dehydration. A profound fluid deficit is usually present, in excess of 9 L on average in adults.
Serum osmolality usually exceeds 320 mOsm/kg. Fluid replacement is a key component of treatment.
Precipitants of HHS:

Infections, such as pneumonia and urinary tract infections, accompanied by decreased fluid intake, are the most common
underlying causes of HHS. Other acute conditions, such as stroke, MI, or pulmonary embolism, may also precipitate HHS.

References

American Academy of Family Physicians. A Guide to Group Visits for Chronic Conditions Affected by Overweight and Obesity.
http://www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/patient_care/fitness/GroupVisitAIM . Accessed September 1, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020. Diabetes
Care. Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S111-S134. Accessed August 17, 2020.

© 2021 Aquifer 9/12

http://www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/patient_care/fitness/GroupVisitAIM

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S111

American Diabetes Association. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2020. Diabetes Care.
Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S14-S31. Accessed August 17, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities: Standards of Medical Care in
Diabetes – 2020. Diabetes Care 2020 Jan; 43, (Supplement 1) S37-S47. Accessed August 17, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Facilitating Behavior Change and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Medical Care
in Diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care. Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S48-S65. Accessed August 19, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Microvascular Complications and Foot Care: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2020. Diabetes
Care. Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S135-S151. Accessed August 18, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2020.
Diabetes Care. Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S98-S110. Accessed August 19, 2020.

American Diabetes Association. Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2020 Diabetes Care.
Jan 2020, 43 (Supplement 1) S32-S36.. 2019; 42, (S1): S29-S33. Accessed August 17, 2020.

Berlin EA, Fowkes WC Jr. A teaching framework for cross-cultural health care. Application in family practice. West J Med.
1983;139(6):934-8.

Blume P, Wu S. Updating the Diabetic Foot Treatment Algorithm: Recommendations on Treatment Using Advanced Medicine and
Therapies. Wounds. 2018;30(2):29-35.

Boulton AJ, Armstrong DG, Albert SF, et al. Comprehensive foot examination and risk assessment: a report of the task force of the foot
care interest group of the American Diabetes Association, with endorsement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.
Diabetes Care. 2008;31(8):1679-85.

Buse JB, Ginsberg HN, Bakris GL, et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in people with diabetes mellitus: a scientific
statement from the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 2007;30:162-72.

CDC. National Chronic Kidney Disease Fact Sheet, 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/kidney_factsheet . Accessed
August 31, 2020.

CDC. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-
report . Accessed August 17, 2020.

Campanella P, Lovato E, Marone C, et al. The impact of electronic health records on healthcare quality: a systematic review and meta-
analysis. Eur J Public Health. 2016;26(1):60-4.

Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, et al. Ezetimibe Added to Statin Therapy after Acute Coronary Syndromes. N Engl J Med.
2015;372(25):2387-97.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Healthy Weight, Nutrition and Physical Activity: Healthy eating for a healthy weight.
https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/healthy_eating. Updated August 17, 2020. Accessed September 1, 2020.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report 2020: Estimates of Diabetes and Its Burden in the
United States. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report Accessed August 17, 2020.

Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Long-term effects of lifestyle intervention or metformin on diabetes development and
microvascular complications over 15-year follow-up: the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol.
2015;3(11):866-75.

Ekstedt M, Franzén LE, Mathiesen UL, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients with NAFLD and elevated liver enzymes. Hepatology.
2006;44(4):865-73.

Familydoctor.org. Diabetic Neuropathy. http://familydoctor.org/familydoctor/en/diseases-conditions/diabetic-
neuropathy/prevention.html. Updated April 24, 2020. Accessed September 1, 2020.

Fong DS, Aiello LP, Ferris FL 3rd, Klein R. Diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(10):2540-53.

Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, et al. CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL
ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT
ALGORITHM – 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(2):207-38.

Hartmann-Boyce J, McRobbie H, Bullen C, Begh R, Stead LF, Hajek P. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database
Syst Rev. 2016;9(9):CD010216. Published 2016 Sep 14.

Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Cultural Competency and Health Literacy Resources for Health Care Providers.
https://www.hrsa.gov/about/organization/bureaus/ohe/health-literacy/culture-language-and-health-literacy. Accessed August 17, 2020.

Healthy Interactions. Conversation Map Programs from Healthy Interactions.
http://healthyinteractions.com/assets/files/HI_Catalog_v01_09_093015 Updated 2015. Accessed September 1, 2020.

Hsu WC, Araneta MR, Kanaya AM, Chiang JL, Fujimoto W. BMI cut points to identify at-risk Asian Americans for type 2 diabetes
screening. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(1):150-8.

Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centered approach:
update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.
*Diabetes Care. 2015;38(1):140-9.

Kalyani RR, Lazo M, Ouyang P, et al. Sex differences in diabetes and risk of incident coronary artery disease in healthy young and
middle-aged adults. Diabetes Care 2014;37:830-8.

© 2021 Aquifer 10/12

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S14

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S37

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S48

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S135

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S98

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_1/S32

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6666112/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29091034/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18663232/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17192355/

https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/kidney_factsheet

https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26136462/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26039521/

https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/healthy_eating

https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report .

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26377054/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17006923/

http://familydoctor.org/familydoctor/en/diseases-conditions/diabetic-neuropathy/prevention.html

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15451934/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28095040/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27622384/

https://www.hrsa.gov/about/organization/bureaus/ohe/health-literacy/culture-language-and-health-literacy

http://healthyinteractions.com/assets/files/HI_Catalog_v01_09_093015

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25538311/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25538310/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24178997/

Kazmi Z. Effects of exam room EHR use on doctor-patient communication: a systematic literature review. Inform Prim Care.
2013;21(1):30-9.

Kempen JH, O’Colmain BJ, Leske MC, et al. The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy among adults in the United States. Arch
Ophthalmol. 2004;122(4):552-63.

Kleinman A. Patients and Healers in the Context of Culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1980.

Kuller, LH et al. Diabetes Mellitus Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease and Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Disease and All-Cause
Mortality. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2000;20:823-29.

Marso SP, Daniels GH, Brown-Frandsen K, et al. Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med.
2016;375(4):311-22.

McNeely MJ, Boyko EJ, Ahroni JH, et al. The independent contributions of diabetic neuropathy and vasculopathy in foot ulceration. How
great are the risks?. Diabetes Care. 1995;18(2):216-19.

Meijer JW, Smit AJ, Lefrandt JD, van der Hoeven JH, Hoogenberg K, Links TP. Back to basics in diagnosing diabetic polyneuropathy with
the tuning fork!. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(9):2201-5.

Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the
initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for
the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(1):193-203.

Peters SA, Huxley RR, Woodward M. Diabetes as a risk factor for stroke in women compared with men: a systematic review and meta-
analysis of 64 cohorts, including 775,385 individuals and 12,539 strokes. Lancet. 2014;383:1973-80.

Pignone M, Alberts MJ, Colwell JA, et al. Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in people with diabetes: a position
statement of the American Diabetes Association, a scientific statement of the American Heart Association, and an expert consensus
document of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Circulation. 2010;121(24):2694-701.

Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Kansagara D, et al. Hemoglobin A1c Targets for Glycemic Control With Pharmacologic Therapy for Nonpregnant
Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Guidance Statement Update From the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med.
2018;168(8):569-76.

Reboussin DM, Allen NB, Griswold ME, et al. Systematic Review for the 2017
ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of
High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical
Practice Guidelines [published correction appears in J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 May 15;71(19):2272-2273]. J Am Coll Cardiol.
2018;71(19):2176-98.

Reiber GE, Vileikyte L, Boyko EJ, et al. Causal pathways for incident lower-extremity ulcers in patients with diabetes from two settings.
Diabetes Care. 1999;22(1):157-62.

Selph S, Dana T, Blazina I, Bougatsos C, Patel H, Chou R. Screening for Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review for the U.S.
Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:765-76.

Sherwin RS, Anderson RM, Buse JB, et al. Prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27 Suppl 1:S47-S54.

Skyler JS, Bergenstal R, Bonow RO, et al. Intensive glycemic control and the prevention of cardiovascular events: implications of the
ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VA diabetes trials: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and a scientific statement of
the American College of Cardiology Foundation and the American Heart Association [published correction appears in Circulation. 2009
Jun 30;119(25):e605]. Circulation. 2009;119(2):351-7.

Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, et al. Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in
Adults: Synopsis of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Cholesterol Guideline. Ann Intern Med.
2014;160:339-43.

Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR. Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes
mellitus: progressive requirement for multiple therapies (UKPDS 49). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. JAMA.
1999;281(21):2005-12.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final Recommendation Statement: Abnormal Blood Glucose and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus:
Screening. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. October 2015. Accessed August 17, 2020.

US Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. National Diabetes
Education Program. Preventing Type 2 Diabetes: Your Game Plan to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-
information/diabetes/overview/preventing-type-2-diabetes/game-plan. Accessed August 31, 2020.

USPSTF. Final Recommendation Statement: Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Colorectal Cancer: Preventive
Medication. April 2016. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/aspirin-to-
prevent-cardiovascular-disease-and-cancer. Accessed August 31, 2020.

Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the
Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: Executive Summary: A Report of the American
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension. 2018;71(6):1269-324.

Writing Group for the DCCT/EDIC Research Group, Orchard TJ, Nathan DM, et al. Association between 7 years of intensive treatment of
type 1 diabetes and long-term mortality. JAMA. 2015;313(1):45-53.

Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, et al. Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med.
© 2021 Aquifer 11/12

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24629654/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15078674/

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/01.ATV.20.3.823

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27295427/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7729300/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16123490/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18945920/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24613026/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20508178/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29507945/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29146534/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10333919/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25867111/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14693925/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19095622/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24474185/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10359389/

https://www.niddk.nih.gov/

https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/screening-for-abnormal-blood-glucose-and-type-2-diabetes

https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/diabetes/overview/preventing-type-2-diabetes/game-plan

https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/aspirin-to-prevent-cardiovascular-disease-and-cancer

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29133354/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25562265/

2015;373(22):2117-28.

Zoungas S, Chalmers J, Neal B, et al. Follow-up of blood-pressure lowering and glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med.
2014;371(15):1392-406.

© 2021 Aquifer 12/12

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26378978/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25234206/

Family Medicine 06: 57-year-old female diabetes care visit
Learning Objectives
Knowledge
Comprehensive Annual Diabetes Visit
Electronic Medical Record
Pathophysiology of Diabetes
Diabetes: Common Manifestations of End-Organ Damage
Acute Diabetic Decompensations (DKA and HHS)
Screening Recommendations for Type 2 Diabetes
Diagnostic Criteria for Diabetes Mellitus
Who Gets Diabetes?
Prediabetes
Diabetic Retinopathy
Diabetes Education: Blood Glucose
Clinical Skills
Understanding the Patient’s Experience of His or Her Illness
Annual Foot Exam for Patients with Diabetes
Monofilament Testing for Patients with Diabetes
How to Request a Referral
Diabetes Education: Conversation Map
Management
Management of Specific ASCVD Risk Factors
ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
Barriers to Initiation of Injectable Therapy
Vaccines Recommended for Patients with Diabetes
Importance of Dental Care for Patients with Diabetes
Team-Based Care for Patients with Diabetes
When to Request an Ophthalmology Referral
Diabetes Education: Daily Foot Care
Diabetes Education: Resources to Improve Diet
Studies
Recommended Diabetes Follow-Up Laboratory Studies
Clinical Reasoning
Hyperosmolar Hyperglycemic State (HHS) versus Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA)
References