ABCD Conference Abstracts Spring Meeting 2016, Manchester

28 (67%), 14 (33%) and 0 (0%) T1DM and 13 (27%), 34 (69%) and 2 (4%) T2DM patients cited a lower, similar or higher rate re - spectively of minor hypoglycaemia with degludec (T1DM: p<0.0001; T2DM: NS). 16 (57%), 12 (43%) and 0 (0%) T1DM and 2 (8%), 22 (92%) and 0 (0%) T2DM patients cited a lower, similar or higher rate respectively of severe hypoglycaemic with degludec (T1DM: p<0.01; T2DM: NS). 21 (66%), 11 (34%) and 0 (0%) T1DM and 9 (30%), 21 (70%) and 0 (0%) T2DM patients cited a lower, similar or higher rate respectively of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with degludec (T1DM: p<0.001; T2DM: NS). The data suggest that patients with T1DM who swap to degludec from another basal insulin due to problems with hypoglycaemia will experience a lower rate of hypoglycaemia on degludec. At present the same result does not hold for T2DM, but the numbers are small. For minor and severe hypoglycaemia there is a trend towards im - provement which may become significant with larger numbers in the audit. The noticeable difference in reporting of improvement in hypoglycaemia in T1DM compared to T2DM makes it less likely that the effect seen in the T1DM patients is wholly explained by regression to the mean.