Type 2 diabetes: why treatment plans may need to be different for older adults

Sep 8, 2021

4 min



Around 6% of the world’s population suffer from type 2 diabetes. People of any age can develop the condition, but the number of older adults with type 2 diabetes is rapidly increasing worldwide. In fact, adults over the age of 65 now account for almost half of all adult cases.


There are many ways type 2 diabetes can be managed – including controlling weight through diet and exercise, or taking a drug to manage blood sugar levels. But many people may not realise that type 2 diabetes in older adults can be more complicated to manage. This means people over 65 may need to be managed differently when it comes to type 2 diabetes.


There are a number of reasons why type 2 diabetes may be more difficult to manage in older adults. First, ageing can affect blood sugar control, as the body’s organs (such as the pancreas, which controls insulin and blood sugar levels) lose their ability to work as well as they used to.


On top of this, some research has shown that diabetes may cause people to age faster. It’s thought that this is due to high levels of sugar in the blood stream prematurely ageing the body’s cells. This premature ageing could lead to diseases associated with age-related decline (such as arthritis or dementia) happening sooner.


Frailty – a state of health that is associated with reduced physical and mental resilience in older adults – also affects more people with type 2 diabetes than the rest of the population. In fact, an estimated 25% of older adults with type 2 diabetes are also frail. People who are frail and have type 2 diabetes have poorer health and increased risk of death from all causes compared to those who are not frail. Frailty is associated with reduced physical and cognitive functions and increased risk of low blood sugar. Both of these factors can make treating type 2 diabetes more complicated.


Dementia, which is more common in older adults, may also make it more difficult to manage type 2 diabetes. This is because the memory problems this condition causes may make it harder for patients to remember to take their medication, or take the proper medication dosage. What’s more, type 2 diabetes in older adults is actually a risk factor for developing dementia – including Alzheimer’s disease. While the link between the two isn’t fully understood, elevated blood sugar levels and insulin not working properly have been suggested as causes.


Having other health conditions can also make it more difficult to treat diabetes. Up to 40% of older adults with type 2 diabetes have four or more co-existing diseases – such as heart disease or dementia. These conditions can make it impossible to achieve normal treatment targets and the drugs used to treat them can interact with those used to treat diabetes – which could lead to harm if not managed carefully. Alongside this, poor access to proper medical care, and being more susceptible to low blood sugar in older age are also reasons why treating diabetes can be so difficult in this age group.


Managing type 2 diabetes


Most medical treatments for type 2 diabetes work to keep blood sugar levels low, and prevent them from spiking. But older adults with type 2 diabetes may actually have an increased risk of developing dangerously low blood sugar levels. This usually happens if the medication is not used at the correct dose, or in people who have had diabetes for a long time.


Older adults can also be susceptible to low blood sugar levels. Syda Productions/ Shutterstock


Having very low blood sugar levels is dangerous as it can increase the risk of falls – a serious and sometimes life-threatening problem in older adults. Very low blood sugar levels also increase the risk of heart problems. This means that healthcare professionals need to be careful they aren’t being too aggressive in treatment plans for older adults to avoid causing other health problems.


Ageing may also alter the body’s response to low blood sugar. This is significant, as when blood sugar falls too low it is extremely dangerous and can even be fatal.


Older adults may also be less able to recognise the symptoms of low blood sugar compared to young adults. This is because symptoms such as dizziness and confusion are often less specific in older adults, and can be confused with dementia. Older adults may also take longer to recover from low blood sugar.


Given that repeated bouts of low blood sugar can mean that older people are less able to sense when it’s happened in the future, it’s important that drugs prescribed to older adults for type 2 diabetes are given at the correct doses. Care especially needs to be taken prescribing insulin, the body’s blood sugar control hormone, to very old adults as this significantly increases the risk of low blood sugar.


Given our ageing population, it is projected that more older adults will have type 2 diabetes in the future. This makes it especially important to improve how we treat diabetes in this age group. Though specific treatment guidelines have been developed, some evidence suggests that care approaches need to be more cautious and personalised to each patient, taking into account their other health conditions, and that treatments consider quality of life for each patient.


This article was co-written by Dr James Brown and Dr Srikanth Bellary

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Aston University

4 min

People still trust scientists: Aston University psychologists contribute to largest post-pandemic study on public trust

Researchers looked at trust in scientists in 68 countries and found relatively high levels of trust everywhere The TISP Many Labs study of 71,922 people included those living in under-researched nations of the Global South The majority of survey participants believe that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. Public trust in scientists is still high, according to a survey carried out in 68 countries by an international team of 241 researchers, led by Dr Viktoria Cologna (Harvard University, ETH Zurich) and Dr Niels Mede (University of Zurich). The study found no evidence of the oft-repeated claim of a crisis of trust in science. The team, which included Aston University School of Psychology’s Dr James Reynolds and Dr Charlotte Pennington, also found that the majority of survey participants believed that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. This study is the result of the Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) Many Labs study, a collaborative effort that allowed the authors to survey 71,922 people in 68 countries, including many under-researched countries in the ‘Global South’. For the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic, the study provides global, representative survey data on the populations and regions of the world in which researchers are perceived to be most trustworthy, the extent to which they should engage with the public and whether science is prioritising important research issues. Dr Mede said: “The study is the most comprehensive post-pandemic snapshot of trust in scientists, societal expectations of their involvement in society and policymaking and public views on research priorities.” Across 68 countries, the study finds that the majority of the public has a relatively high level of trust in scientists (mean trust level = 3.62, on a scale of 1 = very low trust to 5 = very high trust). The majority of respondents also perceive scientists as qualified (78%), honest (57%) and concerned about people’s wellbeing (56%). However, the results also reveal some areas of concern. Globally, less than half of respondents (42%) believe that scientists pay attention to the views of others. Additionally, many people felt that the priorities of science are not always well-aligned with their own priorities. The researchers call upon scientists to take the results seriously and find ways to be more receptive to feedback and more open to dialogue. The findings confirm the results of previous studies that show significant differences between countries and population groups. In particular, people with right-wing political views in Western countries tend to have less trust in scientists than those with left-wing views. This suggests that attitudes toward science tend to polarise along political lines. In most countries, however, political orientation and trust in scientists were not related. A majority of respondents want science to play an active role in society and policymaking. Globally, 83% of respondents believe that scientists should communicate with the public about science, providing an impetus for increased science communication efforts. Only a minority (23%) believe that scientists should not actively advocate for specific policies. 52% believe that scientists should be more involved in the policymaking process. Participants gave high priority to research to improve public health, solve energy problems and reduce poverty. On the other hand, research to develop defence and military technology was given a lower priority. In fact, participants explicitly believe that science is prioritising the development of defence and military technology more than they would like, highlighting a potential misalignment between public and scientific priorities. Dr Cologna said: “Our results show that most people in most countries have relatively high trust in scientists and want them to play an active role in society and policymaking”. Dr Reynolds, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This research demonstrates that people from all around the globe still have high trust in science and want scientists involved in policymaking. When we face great challenges, such as threats to public health or energy crises, the public recognise the importance that scientists can play and want us involved. This is also true of the UK where levels of public trust in science is one of the highest globally.” Dr Pennington, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This project showcases the importance and power of big team science to answer fundamental questions about human behaviour. By pooling our expertise and resources, we were able to reach over 70,000 people and improve sample diversity and representation by recruiting from 68 countries. Overall, the study resulted in an optimistic finding – that people generally trust scientists and agree that they should engage more in society and policymaking. Such trust is important because it allows people to make research-informed decisions about their own lives.” Find out more about the research in Nature Human Behaviour by visiting https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02090-5.

4 min

Aston University-led project finds simple ways to improve the wellbeing of paediatric critical care staff

The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project was carried out in conjunction with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England Paediatric critical care (PCC) staff experience high levels of moral distress, post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout Two simple, low-resource wellbeing sessions can be delivered by staff for staff without specialist training. The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project, led by Aston University researchers in collaboration with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England, has developed two simple, easy-to-deliver sessions to improve the wellbeing of staff in paediatric critical care (PCC) units in UK hospitals. PCC staff are known to experience high levels of moral distress, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and burnout, but often feel little is offered to help them with their mental health. The SWell team at Aston University, led by Professor Rachel Shaw from the Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment, realised following a literature review that there are no existing, evidence-based interventions specifically designed to improve PCC staff wellbeing. Initial work by SWell identified the ‘active ingredients’ likely to create successful intervention designs. Together with a team from NHS England, the Aston University researchers set up the SWell Collaborative Project: Interventions for Staff Wellbeing in Paediatric Critical Care, in PCC units across England and Scotland. The aim of the project was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing wellbeing interventions for staff working in PCC in UK hospitals. In total, 14 of the 28 UK PCC units were involved. One hundred and four intervention sessions were run, attended by 573 individuals. Professor Shaw said: “The significance of healthcare staff wellbeing was brought to the surface during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it’s a problem that has existed far longer than that. As far as we could see researchers had focused on measuring the extent of the problem rather than coming up with possible solutions. The SWell project was initiated to understand the challenges to wellbeing when working in paediatric critical care, to determine what staff in that high-pressure environment need, and what could actually work day-to-day to make a difference. Seeing PCC staff across half the paediatric critical care units in the UK show such enthusiasm and commitment to make the SWell interventions a success has been one of the proudest experiences in my academic career to date.” The two wellbeing sessions tested are low-resource and low-intensity, and can be delivered by staff for staff without any specialist qualifications. In the session ‘Wellbeing Images’, a small group of staff is shown images representing wellbeing, with a facilitated discussion using appreciative inquiry - a way of structuring discussions to create positive change in a system or situation by focusing on what works well, rather than what is wrong. In the ‘Mad-Sad-Glad’ session, another small group reflective session, participants explore what makes them feel mad, sad and glad, and identify positive actions to resolve any issues raised. The key ingredients in both sessions are social support – providing a psychologically safe space where staff can share their sensitive experiences and emotions without judgement, providing support for each other; self-belief – boosting staff’s self-confidence and ability to identify and express their emotions in response to work; and feedback and monitoring – encouraging staff to monitor what increases their stress, when they experience challenging emotions, and what might help boost their wellbeing in those scenarios. Feedback from staff both running and participating in the SWell interventions was very positive, with high satisfaction and feasibility ratings. Participants like that the session facilitated open and honest discussions, provided opportunities to connect with colleagues and offered opportunities for generating solutions and support. One hospital staff member responsible for delivering the sessions said: “Our staff engaged really well, and it created a buzz around the unit with members of the team asking if they could be ‘swelled' on shift. A really positive experience and we are keeping it as part of our staff wellbeing package.” The team concluded that even on busy PCC units, it is feasible to deliver SWell sessions. In addition, following the sessions, staff wellbeing and depression scores improved, indicating their likely positive impact on staff. Further evaluations are needed to determine whether positive changes can be sustained over time following the SWell sessions. The work was funded by Aston University Proof of Concept Fund and NHS England. Donna Austin, an advanced critical care practitioner at University Hospital Southampton paediatric intensive care unit, said: “We were relatively new to implementing wellbeing initiatives, but we recognised the need for measures to be put in place for an improvement in staff wellbeing, as staff had described burnout, stress and poor mood. SWell has enabled our unit to become more acutely aware of the needs of the workforce and adapt what we deliver to suit the needs of the staff where possible. Staff morale and retention has been the greatest outcomes from us participating in the SWell study and ongoing SWell related interventions.” Read the paper about the SWell interventions in the journal Nursing in Critical Care at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nicc.13228. For more information about SWell, visit the website.

2 min

Expert comment available - the Government's announcement for the AI Opportunities Action Plan

Expert comment is available on the the Government's announcement for the AI Opportunities Action Plan in which it is aims to roll out AI across the UK. In a speech setting out the government's plans to use AI across the UK to boost growth and deliver services more efficiently, the Prime Minister said the government had a responsibility to make AI "work for working people". The government claims that the AI Opportunities Action Plan is backed by leading tech firms, some of which have committed £14bn towards various projects, creating 13,250 jobs. It includes plans for growth zones where development will be focused, and the technology will be used to help tackle issues such as potholes. Expert comment: "The plan is a necessary step in the right direction with appropriate investment. It should be coupled with a major training programme at business and public levels to bridge the skill gap and develop essential capabilities. "It is important to specify the role that the higher education sector will play in the delivery of such a plan particularly with regards to innovation and knowledge transfer partnerships. "The government used stated that the technology will be used to help tackle issues such as potholes, however AI should be used not only in the detection of potholes, but also in their prediction. Using predictive analytics would significantly reduce the number of cameras that must be deployed to monitor road surface conditions up and down the country." Professor Abdul Hamid Sadka, Professor of Visual Media Technologies, Director, The Sir Peter Rigby Digital Futures Institute, Aston University For further details contact Nicola Jones, Head of Press & Communications (interim) on (+44) 7825 342091 or email: n.jones6@aston.ac.uk

View all posts