Abstract
Chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes (T2D), are difficult to manage because they demand continuous therapeutic review and monitoring. Beyond achieving the target HbA1c, new guidelines for the therapy of T2D have been introduced with the new groups of antidiabetics, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1ra) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-in). Despite new guidelines, clinical inertia, which can be caused by physicians, patients or the healthcare system, results in T2D not being effectively managed. This opinion paper explores the shift in T2D treatment, challenging assumptions and evidence-based recommendations, particularly for family physicians, considering the patient's overall situation in decision-making. We looked for the possible reasons for clinical inertia and the poor application of guidelines in the management of T2D. Guidelines for antidiabetic drugs should be more precise, providing case studies and clinical examples to define clinical contexts and contraindications. Knowledge communication can improve confidence and should include clear statements on areas of decision-making not supported by evidence. Precision medicine initiatives in diabetes aim to identify subcategories of T2D patients (including frail patients) using clustering techniques from data science applications, focusing on CV and poor treatment outcomes. Clear, unconditional recommendations for personalized T2D management may encourage drug prescription, especially for family physicians dealing with diverse patient contexts and clinical settings.