OBJECTIVES: Compare patient characteristics, medication use, diabetes-related charges, and resource utilization between patients with Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who initiated therapy with an oral fixed combination (OFC) therapy and those treated with two medications which are available in OFC formulation (dual). METHODS: Data for this study were obtained from the i3 inVision™ databases over the time period from January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2010.  The analyses compares patients who initiated therapy on an OFC (N=4271) to those who initiated on two classes of oral medications which are available in an OFC combination (N=1780).  Patients were followed for 2 years post initiation and all analyses are descriptive in nature.  RESULTS: Patients who initiated on an OFC, compared to those treated with dual oral medications,  were less likely to be diagnosed with a microvascular (14.17% vs. 17.02%: p=0.0046) or macrovascular (10.68% vs. 14.21%; P<0.0001) complication in the pre-period, although they were more likely to be prescribed an ACE (11.59 vs. 7.64%; P<0.0001),  ARB (9.58% vs. 4,44%; P<0.0001), or statin (13.28% vs. 10.67%; P<0.0001) in the pre-period.  Use of OFC, compared to use of dual therapies, was associated with a significant reduction in post-period hospitalization rates (15.83% vs. 21.80%; P<0.0001) as well as a lower likelihood of an ER visit (2.39% vs. 3.48%; P=0.0168) and lower diabetes-related inpatient ($2174 v $3034; P=0.0020), outpatient ($2490 vs. $2,870; P=0.0042), drug ($1576 vs. $2084; P<0.0001) and total charges ($6,250 v $8,019; P<0.0001).  Use of an OFC was associated with a significantly higher medication possession ratio (0.58 vs. 0.51; P<0.0001) and such patients were less likely to have a gap in the medication therapy of 60 days or more (32.76% vs. 37.81%; P=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The use of an OFC was associated with improved patient adherence and lower diabetes-related charges compared the dual cohort.