Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a significant and growing global health concern. Worldwide, 537 million adults have diabetes and 206 million of them are from the Western Pacific Region1. Local prevalence continues to remain high at 7.5%, with 4,303,899 adult Filipinos suffering from diabetes in 2021. DM significantly contributes to the growing burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) worldwide with about 50% of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) being due to diabetic nephropathy alone. Likewise, 60% of Filipinos on maintenance dialysis have ESRD due to DM and hypertension. The primary care setting is the initial point of contact between healthcare providers and patients with type 2 diabetes, hence, the development of clinical practice guidelines that will provide guidance in caring for patients with stable complications of diabetes. The guideline is the first of 3 that are being developed by the Philippine Academy of Family Physicians for the diagnosis and management of adult patients with type 2 diabetes and stable microvascular complications – nephropathy, retinopathy and neuropathy.

This guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations on the diagnosis and management of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and early stage CKD and is divided into 5 main sections – Clinical Assessment, Diagnostic Tests, Pharmacologic Treatment, Non-pharmacologic Treatment and Patient Outcomes.

The method of guideline development followed the ADAPTE process. The Technical Working Group identified 19 key questions after consultation with colleagues and patients. Recommendations were adopted from high-quality clinical practice guidelines whenever applicable for most of the key clinical questions. On the other hand, the De Novo method of evidence review was used to answer key clinical questions for which recommendations from reviewed guidelines were not available. A modified GRADEPro was used in assessing the quality of evidence – high, moderate, low or very low. Following external review by a nephrologist, the draft recommendations were sent to the members of the consensus panel. Voting on whether to include or not by the consensus panel was facilitated to determine the strength of each recommendation – strong, moderate or weak.

After reviewing 3 high-quality clinical practice guidelines and the current evidence, the technical working group was able to develop 40 recommendations for the 19 key clinical questions.