2026-08-29T14:25:13Zhttps://repisalud.isciii.es/rest/oai/request
oai:repisalud.isciii.es:20.500.12105/176282024-02-08T14:41:49Zcom_20.500.12105_15322com_20.500.12105_2051col_20.500.12105_16927
Repisalud author Pérez-Belmonte, Luis M author Gómez-Doblas, Juan J author Millán-Gómez, Mercedes author López-Carmona, María D author Guijarro-Merino, Ricardo author Carrasco-Chinchilla, Fernando author de Teresa-Galván, Eduardo author Jiménez-Navarro, Manuel author Bernal-López, M Rosa author Gómez-Huelgas, Ricardo 2024-02-08T14:41:49Z 2024-02-08T14:41:49Z 2018-09-11 10.3390/jcm7090271 2077-0383 Journal of clinical medicine http://hdl.handle.net/10668/12937 30208631 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/17628 The use of noninsulin antihyperglycaemic drugs in the hospital setting has not yet been fully described. This observational study compared the efficacy and safety of the standard basal-bolus insulin regimen versus a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (linagliptin) plus basal insulin in medicine department inpatients in real-world clinical practice. We retrospectively enrolled non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes with mild to moderate hyperglycaemia and no injectable treatments at home who were treated with a hospital antihyperglycaemic regimen (basal-bolus insulin, or linagliptin-basal insulin) between January 2016 and December 2017. Propensity score was used to match patients in both treatment groups and a comparative analysis was conducted to test the significance of differences between groups. After matched-pair analysis, 227 patients were included per group. No differences were shown between basal-bolus versus linagliptin-basal regimens for the mean daily blood glucose concentration after admission (standardized difference = 0.011), number of blood glucose readings between 100⁻140 mg/dL (standardized difference = 0.017) and >200 mg/dL (standardized difference = 0.021), or treatment failures (standardized difference = 0.011). Patients on basal-bolus insulin received higher total insulin doses and a higher daily number of injections (standardized differences = 0.298 and 0.301, respectively). Basal and supplemental rapid-acting insulin doses were similar (standardized differences = 0.003 and 0.012, respectively). There were no differences in hospital stay length (standardized difference = 0.003), hypoglycaemic events (standardized difference = 0.018), or hospital complications (standardized difference = 0.010) between groups. This study shows that in real-world clinical practice, the linagliptin-basal insulin regimen was as effective and safe as the standard basal-bolus regimen in non-critical patients with type 2 diabetes with mild to moderate hyperglycaemia treated at home without injectable therapies. eng diabetes mellitus hospital care inpatient hyperglycaemia linagliptin Use of Linagliptin for the Management of Medicine Department Inpatients with Type 2 Diabetes in Real-World Clinical Practice (Lina-Real-World Study). research article