版权归中华医学会所有。
未经授权,不得转载、摘编本刊文章。
引用本文:简喜超, 简扬, 邓呈亮. 2025版《中国糖尿病足防治实践指南》解读[J]. 中华医学美学美容杂志, 2026, 32(2): 99-103. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn114657-20251215-00266.
通信作者:邓呈亮,Email:该Email地址已收到反垃圾邮件插件保护。要显示它您需要在浏览器中启用JavaScript。
Athina Stamati1 · Athanasios Christoforidis2
Received: 7 October 2024 / Accepted: 31 December 2024 / Published online: 10 January 2025 © The Author(s) 2025
Abstract
Aims To assess the efficacy and safety of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems compared to standard care in managing glycaemic control during pregnancy in women with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM).
Methods We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, registries and conference abstracts up to June 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing AID to standard care in pregnant women with T1DM. We con-ducted random effects meta-analyses for % of 24-h time in range of 63–140 mg/dL (TIR), time in hyperglycaemia (>140 mg/ dl and>180 mg/dL), hypoglycaemia (<63 mg/dl and<54 mg/dL), total insulin dose (units/kg/day), glycemic variability (%), changes in HbA1c (%), maternal and fetal outcomes.
Results Thirteen studies (450 participants) were included. AID significantly increased TIR (Mean difference, MD 7.01%, 95% CI 3.72–10.30) and reduced time in hyperglycaemia>140 mg/dL and>180 mg/dL (MD – 5.09%, 95% CI – 9.41 to – 0.78 and MD – 2.44%, 95% CI – 4.69 to – 0.20, respectively). Additionally, glycaemic variability was significantly reduced (MD – 1.66%, 95% CI – 2.73 to – 0.58). Other outcomes did not differ significantly.
Conclusion AID systems effectively improve glycaemic control during pregnancy in women with T1DM by increasing TIR and reducing hyperglycaemia without any observed adverse short-term effects on maternal and fetal outcomes.
Keywords Automated insulin delivery · Pregnancy · Type 1 diabetes mellitus · Systematic review · Meta-analysis
Sleep quantity, quality and timing are significantly associated with the development of type 2 diabetes and have an impact on glycaemic control and cardiovascular disease risk in those with established diabetes, according to this narrative review in Diabetes Care. The authors are concerned that, although clinicians commonly explore physical activity and diet with people at risk of or with type 2 diabetes, they are less likely to ask about sleep. They outline normal sleep structure, share four simple questions to elicit sleep status and summarise the data supporting the role of sleep within the “5S” framework of 24-hour movement (Sleeping, Sitting, Stepping, Sweating and Strengthening) included in the ADA/EASD consensus report on the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes. They also share the evolving evidence base supporting the association between sleep and type 2 diabetes, describe how to assess sleep and manage sleep disorders, and advise on helping people set simple goals. It is hoped this will translate into more clinicians spending time discussing sleep in future.
Pam Brown GP in Swansea
Citation: Brown P (2024) Optimising sleep – simple questions and goals. Diabetes & Primary Care 26: 99–101
Clinicians rarely discuss sleep when exploring risk of type 2 diabetes or management of those with the condition, even though this has been included in the ADA/EASD consensus report on management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes since 2022 (Davies et al, 2022). Reasons given for reluctance to discuss sleep include lack of confidence and knowledge about which questions to ask and how to assess sleep, and lack of understanding of the significant impact on glycaemia. Lack of time in busy clinics is also likely to impact willingness to ask about sleep, and indeed other aspects of lifestyle. In this narrative review published in Diabetes Care, Joseph Henson and colleagues from the University of Leicester aimed to provide information which may increase sleep discussions in relation to type 2 diabetes.
Sleep has a specific architectural structure,
which includes cycles of:
● Stage N1 (NREM): Falling asleep – a few minutes’ duration, followed by 4–5 cycles of:
● Stage 2 (NREM): Light sleep, lasting 10–25 minutes per cycle. Heart rate and breathing slow down and body temperature drops.
● Stage 3 (NREM): Slow-wave sleep, lasting 20–40 minutes per cycle. This is the deepest sleep state and allows repair, growth and cell regeneration. Get shorter as night continues.
● REM: Dreaming stage – rapid eye movements, increased brain activity and temporary muscle paralysis. This stage is important for cognitive function. The initial phase lasts a few minutes, and it can then build up to 60 minutes as the night progresses and should account for 25% of total sleep time.
It is important to identify and manage sleep disorders such as obstructive sleep apnoea, restless leg syndrome and other sleep disrupters such as depression, pain or urinary problems that cause waking or difficulty getting to sleep.
Sleep quantity
The review describes a U-shaped association between quantity of sleep and risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes, with most guidance identifying at least 7 hours per night as optimal. Sleeping less than 6 hours or more than 9 hours are both associated with up to a 50% increased risk of type 2 diabetes, including progression from non-diabetic hyperglycaemia to type 2 diabetes (Mostafa et al, 2022). Each hour over or under 7 hours is associated with a 9–14% increased risk of type 2 diabetes. However, the evidence for long sleep being associated with higher cardiometabolic risk, including diabetes, is less certain. Studies in short sleepers have demonstrated decreased insulin resistance and reduced energy intake when sleep is extended.
In those with type 2 diabetes, sleep quantity has a U-shaped association with HbA1c and fasting glucose, with evidence that more than 8 hours per night and less than 6 hours per night have an adverse impact, and short sleep is also associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. A UK Biobank study demonstrated that 5 hours or less per night is associated with a 40–70% increased risk of ischaemic stroke and cardiovascular mortality compared to 7 hours per night (Han et al, 2023). Four hours’ sleep or less is associated with a 41% increased risk of all-cause mortality and 54% increased risk cardiovascular mortality compared with 7 hours per night (Li et al, 2022).
Sleep quality
Defined as “an individual’s self-satisfaction with all aspects of the sleep experience”, sleep quality is based on sleep efficiency (time asleep as a percentage of time in bed intending to sleep), sleep latency (time taken to fall asleep), sleep duration and wakefulness after sleep onset. Sleep quality can be assessed formally using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, which explores multiple aspects of sleep quality; however, the review recommends starting with a simple question: “Are you a good sleeper?”. The highest risk of developing type 2 diabetes occurs in those with poor sleep quality (von Schantz et al, 2021). This is supported by meta-analyses, with a 40–84% increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes associated with poor sleep quality.
In those with existing diabetes, sleep quality is significantly associated with HbA1c, but there is less evidence on the associations between poor sleep quality and risk of cardiovascular disease. A single cohort study in people with new type 2 diabetes (<6 months) demonstrated a 24% increased risk of all cardiovascular disease and development of coronary heart disease compared to those with good-quality sleep. All-cause mortality was also increased in those with diabetes and poor-quality sleep in a Biobank study, which showed a hazard ratio of 1.87 compared to those who had neither or only one of these conditions (von Schantz et al, 2021).
Timing and chronotype
Circadian rhythm in humans depends on the master clock in the suprachiasmatic nucleus and additional clocks in the peripheral tissues. Sleep timing is dependent on sleep debt, our body clock and neurohormonal pathways including melatonin levels. Small amounts of day-to-day variability are built into our systems, but larger amounts will result in “social jetlag”. If we consider the midpoint of our sleep on different nights, a significant difference, as will occur with shift work, is likely to trigger social jetlag. “Night owls” have a 2.5-fold increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared with “larks”, independent of the quantity and quality of sleep. A recent cohort study of middle-aged nurses demonstrated a 19% increased diabetes risk in those who were self-declared night owls compared with larks (Kiamersi et al, 2023). Those who have experienced shift work are 10% more likely to develop type 2 diabetes, whilst those with diabetes working night shifts generally have higher HbA1c than those working day shifts alone. There is also an interaction between night shifts and chronotype, with larks’ diabetes risk impacted more by night working.
Amongst those with type 2 diabetes, social jetlag was associated with slightly higher HbA1c, and a significant relationship was seen between later chronotypes and HbA1c, but only for social jetlag of >90 minutes. Increased cardiovascular risk, including mortality, was also associated with disrupted circadian rhythm and sleep rest cycles, including in those with type 2 diabetes. A UK Biobank study including people with type 2 diabetes demonstrated higher all-cause mortality in those who were definite night owlsversus larks (Knutson and von Schantz, 2018).
Mechanisms
The review explores potential mechanisms behind these risks, including the impact of short sleep on cortisol (higher in evenings and slower decline) resulting in lowered response of beta-cells to glucose and lower insulin sensitivity. Short sleep can increase levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and increase hunger and appetite, driven by the lowering of leptin and raising of ghrelin. Polymorphisms of some of the clock genes are also known to increase type 2 diabetes risk.
Implications for practice
Asking four simple questions can identify whether sleep is likely to be impacting a person’s risk of type 2 diabetes, or glycaemia in those who already have the condition:
● “How many hours of sleep did you get last night?”
● “Are you a good sleeper?”
● “Do you have regular sleep timing across work days and non-work days?”
● “Would you say you are an early bird, who prefers mornings, a night owl who prefers evenings or neither?”
More in-depth information may be gathered using questionnaires; wearable devices including headbands, rings, watches and apps; and polysomnography.
The Epworth Sleepiness Scale and the STOP-BANG questionnaire can be self-administered and may highlight daytime sleepiness and increased risk of obstructive sleep apnoea, respectively. Either of these should prompt referral for confirmation of the diagnosis and consideration for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or other management, including weight loss. Restless leg syndrome may have a significant detrimental impact on sleep, and ropinirole can be discussed. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and CBT for Insomnia (CBTi) are recommended as first-line therapy for insomnia.
Simple education about the importance of sleep, sleep hygiene and pragmatic goals (7 hours’ sleep per night, 85% time in bed asleep, keeping the midpoint of sleep within a 90-minute window every night when possible) and fast-tracking those with a sleep disorder to receive appropriate assessment could change practice.
Conclusions
As with other aspects of lifestyle, clinicians often perceive they lack knowledge and time to explore sleep. It is hoped that improved understanding of the associations between sleep, risk of developing type 2 diabetes, glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk, combined with simple goals to share for management, will empower clinicians to discuss sleep more often. It should also make us look at our own sleep and the likely future impact of this.
Resources
● At a glance factsheet: Sleep and type 2 diabetes – Diabetes & Primary Care
● STOP-BANG questionnaire for assessing obstructive sleep apnoea risk – GPnotebook
● Epworth sleepiness scale – GPnotebook
References
1. Davies MJ, Aroda VR, Collins BS et al (2022) Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetologia 65: 1925–66
2. Han H, Wang Y, Li T et al (2023) Sleep duration and risks of incident cardiovascular disease and mortality among people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 46: 101–10
3. Henson J, Covenant A, Hall AP et al (2024) Waking up to the importance of sleep in type 2 diabetes management: A narrative review. Diabetes Care 47: 331–43
4. Kianersi S, Liu Y, Guasch-Ferré M et al (2023) Chronotype, unhealthy lifestyle, and diabetes risk in middle-aged U.S. women: A prospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med 176: 1330–9
5. Knutson KL, von Schantz M (2018) Associations between chronotype, morbidity and mortality in the UK Biobank cohort. Chronobiol Int 35: 1045–53
6. Li CI, Lin CC, Liu CS et al (2022) Sleep duration predicts subsequent long-term mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: A large single-center cohort study. Cardiovasc Diabetol 21: 60
7. Mostafa SA, Mena SC, Antza C et al (2022) Sleep behaviours and associated habits and the progression of pre-diabetes to type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diab Vasc Dis Res 19: 14791641221088824
8. von Schantz M, Ong JC, Knutson KL (2021) Associations between sleep disturbances, diabetes and mortality in the UK Biobank cohort: A prospective population-based study. J Sleep Res 30: e13392
This article is excerpted from the Diabetes & Primary Care Vol 26 No 3 2024 by Wound World.
伤口世界平台生态圈,以“关爱人间所有伤口患者”为愿景,连接、整合和拓展线上和线下的管理慢性伤口的资源,倡导远程、就近和居家管理慢性伤口,解决伤口专家的碎片化时间的价值创造、诊疗经验的裂变复制、和患者的就近、居家和低成本管理慢性伤口的问题。
2019广东省医疗行业协会伤口管理分会年会
扫一扫了解详情:
任何关于疾病的建议都不能替代执业医师的面对面诊断。所有门诊时间仅供参考,最终以医院当日公布为准。
网友、医生言论仅代表其个人观点,不代表本站同意其说法,请谨慎参阅,本站不承担由此引起的法律责任。