Youth-onset type 2 diabetes is a serious public health problem for Indigenous people throughout the world. This article reviews the epidemiology, disease burden, treatment, and challenges in achieving successful clinical management of this disorder in Indigenous youth. Screening criteria and the complications and comorbidities of type 2 diabetes are also reviewed.
Previously undetected dysglycaemia is common among patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). The aim of this study was to identify the most reliable method of diagnosing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and prediabetes in ACS patients.
Patients admitted to the coronary care unit with ACSs and no previous history of T2DM were consecutively included in the study. Glucose metabolism was measured by glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2-hour plasma glucose (2hPG) with a standard oral glucose tolerance test during hospital admission, and this process was repeated 3 months later. In this study, the diagnosis of T2DM required at least two measurements above the diabetes cut-off point according to current American Diabetes Association and World Health Organization criteria.
A total of 250 patients were included in the study. T2DM was diagnosed in 7.2%. The sensitivities for detecting T2DM were 33.3%, 61.1% and 77.8% during admission and 27.8%, 61.1% and 72.2% at follow-up for HbA1c, FPG and 2hPG, respectively. The positive predictive values (PPVs) for diagnosing T2DM were 100%, 91.7% and 51.9% during admission and 71.4%, 91.7% and 65.0% at follow-up for HbA1c, FPG and 2hPG, respectively. The specificities and negative predictive values were high for all methods. By combining all measurements, the sensitivity was 100% and the PPV was 44.2%, while the combination of all HbA1c and FPG measurements provided 88.9% sensitivity and 80.0% PPV.
Diagnosis of T2DM can be reliably carried out by repeated measurements of FPG and HbA1c in ACS patients, with limited added value of an oral glucose tolerance test.
Health check programmes for chronic disease have been introduced in a number of countries. However, there are few trials assessing the benefits and harms of these screening programmes at the population level. In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated the effect of population-based screening for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors on mortality rates and cardiovascular events.
This register-based, non-randomised, controlled trial included men and women aged 40-69 years without known diabetes who were registered with a general practice in Denmark (n = 1,912,392). Between 2001 and 2006, 153,107 individuals registered with 181 practices participating in the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care (ADDITION)-Denmark study were sent a diabetes risk score questionnaire. Individuals at moderate-to-high risk were invited to visit their GP for assessment of diabetes status and cardiovascular risk (screening group). The 1,759,285 individuals registered with all other general practices in Denmark constituted the retrospectively constructed no-screening (control) group. Outcomes were mortality rate and cardiovascular events (cardiovascular disease death, non-fatal ischaemic heart disease or stroke). The analysis was performed according to the intention-to-screen principle.
Among the screening group, 27,177 (18%) individuals attended for assessment of diabetes status and cardiovascular risk. Of these, 1,533 were diagnosed with diabetes. During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, there were 11,826 deaths in the screening group and 141,719 in the no-screening group (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.96, 1.02], p = 0.66). There were 17,941 cardiovascular events in the screening group and 208,476 in the no-screening group (HR 0.99 [0.96, 1.02], p = 0.49).
A population-based stepwise screening programme for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors among all middle-aged adults in Denmark was not associated with a reduction in rate of mortality or cardiovascular events between 2001 and 2012.
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 2015 Dec 1;163(11):861-8 PMID 26501513
There is continuing debate about the net benefits of population screening for type 2 diabetes. We compared the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality among incident cases of type 2 diabetes in a screened group with those in an unscreened group.
In this register-based non-randomised controlled trial, eligible individuals were all men and women aged 40-69 years without known diabetes, registered with a general practice in Denmark (n = 1,912,392). Between 2001 and 2006, 153,107 individuals registered with 181 practices participating in the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care (ADDITION)-Denmark study were sent a diabetes-risk-score questionnaire. Individuals at moderate-to-high risk were invited to visit their family doctor for assessment of diabetes status and cardiovascular risk (screening group). The 1,759,285 individuals registered with all other practices in Denmark constituted the retrospectively constructed no-screening (control) group. In this post hoc analysis, we identified individuals from the screening and no-screening groups who were diagnosed with diabetes between 2001 and 2009 (n = 139,075), and compared risk of CVD and mortality in these groups between 2001 and 2012.
In the screening group, 27,177/153,107 (18%) individuals attended for screening, of whom 1533 were diagnosed with diabetes. Between 2001 and 2009, 13,992 people were newly diagnosed with diabetes in the screening group (including those diagnosed by screening) and 125,083 in the no-screening group. Between 2001 and 2012, the risks of CVD and mortality were lower among individuals with diabetes in the screening group compared with individuals with diabetes in the no-screening (control) group (CVD HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.80, 0.89; mortality HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74, 0.84).
A single round of diabetes screening and cardiovascular risk assessment in middle-aged Danish adults in general practice was associated with a significant reduction in risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events in those diagnosed with diabetes.
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 2015 Dec 1;163(11):861-8 PMID 26501513
To investigate methods for the detection of different clusterings of the insulin-resistant abnormalities consistent with the concept of the 'metabolic syndrome' in clinical practice, and to research the occurrence of these clusters in a middle-aged Finnish population.
We studied a random sample of 207 middle-aged subjects in the city of Tampere, and all 1148 subjects of four middle-aged age groups in Pieksamaki town, in central Finland. Clusterings of the following eight markers of insulin resistance were recorded as the main outcome measures: 1) at least one first-degree relative with non-insulin-dependent diabetes (NIDDM); 2) obesity: body mass index (BMI) > or = 30 kg/m2; 3) central adiposity: waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) > or = 1.00 in men and > or = 0.88 in women; 4) hypertension: systolic blood pressure > or = 160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > or = 95 mmHg, or receiving drug treatment for hypertension; 5) hypertriglyceridaemia > or = 1.70 mmol/l; 6) low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol: or = 13.0 mU/l.
The metabolic syndrome, defined as a clustering of dyslipidaemia (hypertriglyceridaemia, low HDL cholesterol, or both) and insulin resistance (abnormal glucose tolerance, hyperinsulinaemia, or both) was present in 17% of men and in 8% of women; this sex difference was statistically significant (P