Objective: We explored barriers to proper foot care in this population using a qualitative approach with focus group discussions (FGD). Methods: Participants were recruited from clinics at a safety-net hospital in Atlanta, Georgia and stratified into two groups: diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) and minor amputation (below ankle). The FGDs addressed patient experience in receiving care with a goal of understanding: foot care knowledge, barriers to care, and preferred educational methods. Surveys were performed to supplement FGDs. Results: Forty participants (90% Black) were enrolled. Dominant themes emerging from FGDs were: 1-Patients reported adequate understanding of recommended foot care practices; 2-Personal barriers to self-care included lack of motivation, high cost, poor insurance coverage of supplies, and difficulty limiting activity for proper offloading; 3-Hospital system barriers included difficulty making timely appointments and reaching a provider to arrange care; 4-Access to footcare-related information and services improved with greater disease severity. Participants stressed that improved access often came too late to alter their course. They expressed interest in developing peer support groups to facilitate learning and sharing information relating to DFU. Conclusion: We found that patients with DFU or minor amputations have adequate footcare-related knowledge, but personal and systemic barriers limited appropriate foot care.
In the CTSA era there is great interest in aggregating and comparing populations across institutions. These sites likely represent data differently in their clinical data warehouses and other databases. Clinical data warehouses frequently are structured in a generalized way that supports many constituencies. For research, there is a need to transform these heterogeneous data into a shared representation, and to perform categorization and interpretation to optimize the data representation for investigators. We are addressing this need by extending an existing temporal abstraction-based clinical database query system, PROTEMPA. The extended system allows specifying data types of interest in federated databases, extracting the data into a shared representation, transforming it through categorization and interpretation, and loading it into a registry database that can be refreshed. Such a registry's access control, data representation and query tools can be tailored to the needs of research while keeping local databases as the source of truth.
Aims
To compare the utility of metabolic syndrome (MetS) to random plasma glucose (RPG) in identifying people with diabetes or prediabetes.
Methods
RPG was measured and an OGTT was performed in 1,155 adults. Test performance was measured by are under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AROC).
Results
Diabetes was found in 5.1% and prediabetes in 20.0%. AROC for MetS with FPG was 0.80 to detect diabetes, and 0.76 for diabetes or prediabetes – similar to RPG (0.82 and 0.72). However, the AROC for MetS excluding fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was lower: 0.69 for diabetes (p<0.01 vs. both RPG and MetS with FPG), and 0.69 for diabetes or prediabetes. AROCs for MetS with FPG and RPG were comparable and higher for recognizing diabetes in blacks vs. whites, and females vs. males. MetS with FPG was superior to RPG for identifying diabetes only in subjects with age <40 or BMI <25.
Conclusions
MetS features can be used to identify risk of diabetes, but predictive usefulness is driven largely by FPG. Overall, to identify diabetes or prediabetes in blacks and whites with varying age and BMI, MetS is no better than RPG – a more convenient and less expensive test.
Aims: To understand the metabolic and temporal links in the relationship between diabetes and depression, we determined the association between depressive symptoms and unrecognized glucose intolerance.
Methods: In a cross-sectional study, 1047 subjects without known diabetes were screened for diabetes or pre-diabetes using the oral glucose tolerance test and for depressive symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ).
Results: Mean age was 48 years, body mass index 30 kg/m2; 63% were female, 54% black, 11% previously treated for depression and 10% currently treated; 5% had diabetes and 34% pre-diabetes. Median PHQ score was 2 (interquartile range 0–5). Depressive symptoms did not increase with worsening glucose tolerance, after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, family history, exercise, education and depression treatment.
Conclusions: There is no association between depressive symptoms and unrecognized glucose intolerance. However, it remains possible that diagnosed diabetes, with its attendant health concerns, management issues, and/or biological changes, may be a risk for subsequent development of depression. Thus, patients with newly diagnosed diabetes should be counselled appropriately and monitored for the development of depression.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to compare glycemic control between blacks and whites in a setting where patient and provider behavior is assessed, and where a uniform treatment algorithm is used to guide care.
Methods
This observational cohort study was conducted in 3542 patients (3324 blacks, 218 whites) with type 2 diabetes with first and 1-year follow-up visits to a municipal diabetes clinic; a subset had 2-year follow-up. Patient adherence and provider management were determined. The primary endpoint was A1c.
Results
At presentation, A1c was higher in blacks than whites (8.9% vs 8.3%; P < .001), even after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. During 1 year of follow-up, patient adherence to scheduled visits and medications was comparable in both groups, and providers intensified medications with comparable frequency and amount. After 1 year, A1c differences decreased but remained significant (7.7% vs 7.3%; P = .029), even in multivariable analysis (P = .003). However, after 2 years, A1c differences were no longer observed by univariate (7.6% vs 7.5%; P = .51) or multivariable analysis (P = .18).
Conclusions
Blacks have higher A1c than whites at presentation, but differences narrow after 1 year and disappear after 2 years of care in a setting where patient and provider behavior are comparable and that emphasizes uniform intensification of therapy. Presumably, racial disparities at presentation reflected prior inequalities in management. Use of uniform care algorithms nationwide should help to reduce disparities in diabetes outcomes.
Aims: Diabetes-related amputations are typically preceded by a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) but models to assess the quality of care are lacking. We investigated a model to measure inpatient and outpatient quality. Methods: Cohort study among adults hospitalized with a DFU to a safety-net hospital during 2016. We measured adherence to DFU-related quality metrics based on guidelines during and 12 months following hospitalization. Inpatient metrics included ankle-brachial index measurement during or 6 months prior to hospitalization, receiving diabetes education and a wound offloading device prior to discharge. Outpatient metrics included wound care ≤30 days of discharge, in addition to hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≤8%, tobacco cessation, and retention in care (≥2 clinic visits ≥90 days apart) 12 months following discharge. Results: 323 patients were included. Regarding inpatient metrics, 8% had an ankle brachial index measurement, 37% received diabetes education, and 20% received offloading prior to discharge. Regarding outpatient metrics, 33% received wound care ≤30 days of discharge. Twelve months following discharge, 34% achieved a HbA1c ≤8%, 13% quit tobacco, and 52% were retained in care. Twelve-month amputation-free survival was 71%. Conclusions: Our model demonstrated large gaps in DFU guideline-adherent care. Implementing measures to close these gaps could prevent amputations.
OBJECTIVE
Age, BMI, and race/ethnicity are used in National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines to prompt screening for pre-diabetes and diabetes, but cutoffs have not been evaluated rigorously.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Random plasma glucose (RPG) was measured and 75-g oral glucose tolerance tests were performed in 1,139 individuals without known diabetes. Screening performance was assessed by logistic regression and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AROC).
RESULTS
NIDDK/ADA indicators age >45 years and BMI >25 kg/m2 provided significant detection of both diabetes and dysglycemia (both AROCs 0.63), but screening was better with continuous-variable models of age, BMI, and race and better still with models of age, BMI, race, sex, and family history (AROC 0.78 and 0.72). However, screening was even better with RPG alone (AROCs 0.81 and 0.72). RPG >125 mg/dl could be used to prompt further evaluation with an OGTT.
CONCLUSIONS
Use of age, BMI, and race/ethnicity in guidelines for screening to detect diabetes and pre-diabetes may be less important than evaluation of RPG. RPG should be investigated further as a convenient, inexpensive screen with good predictive utility.
OBJECTIVE
An International Expert Committee (IEC) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) proposed diagnostic criteria for diabetes and pre-diabetes based on A1C levels. We hypothesized that screening for diabetes and pre-diabetes with A1C measurements would differ from using oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT).
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
We compared pre-diabetes, dysglycemia (diabetes or pre-diabetes), and diabetes identified by the proposed criteria (A1C ≥6.5% for diabetes and 6.0–6.4% [IEC] or 5.7–6.4% [ADA] for high risk/pre-diabetes) with standard OGTT diagnoses in three datasets. Non-Hispanic white or black adults without known diabetes who had A1C and 75-g OGTT measurements were included from the prospective Screening for Impaired Glucose Tolerance study (n = 1,581), and from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III (n = 2014), and NHANES 2005–2006 (n = 1,111).
RESULTS
OGTTs revealed pre-diabetes in 35.8% and diabetes in 5.2% of combined study subjects. A1C provided receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve areas for diabetes of 0.79–0.83, but ROC curve areas were ≤0.70 for dysglycemia or pre-diabetes. The proposed criteria missed 70% of individuals with diabetes, 71–84% with dysglycemia, and 82–94% with pre-diabetes. Compared with the IEC criteria, the ADA criteria for pre-diabetes resulted in fewer false-negative and more false-positive result. There were also racial differences, with false-positive results being more common in black subjects and false-negative results being more common in white subjects. With use of NHANES 2005–2006 data, ∼5.9 million non-Hispanic U.S. adults with unrecognized diabetes and 43–52 million with pre-diabetes would be missed by screening with A1C.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed A1C diagnostic criteria are insensitive and racially discrepant for screening, missing most Americans with undiagnosed diabetes and pre-diabetes.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the proportion of the American population who would merit metformin treatment, according to recent American Diabetes Association (ADA) consensus panel recommendations to prevent or delay the development of diabetes.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Risk factors were evaluated in 1,581 Screening for Impaired Glucose Tolerance (SIGT), 2,014 Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), and 1,111 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005–2006 (NHANES 2005–2006) subjects, who were non-Hispanic white and black, without known diabetes. Criteria for consideration of metformin included the presence of both impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), with ≥1 additional diabetes risk factor: age <60 years, BMI ≥35 kg/m2, family history of diabetes, elevated triglycerides, reduced HDL cholesterol, hypertension, or A1C >6.0%.
RESULTS
Isolated IFG, isolated IGT, and IFG and IGT were found in 18.0, 7.2, and 8.2% of SIGT; 22.3, 6.4, and 9.4% of NHANES III; and 21.8, 5.0, and 9.0% of NHANES 2005–2006 subjects, respectively. In SIGT, NHANES III, and NHANES 2005–2006, criteria for metformin consideration were met in 99, 96, and 96% of those with IFG and IGT; 31, 29, and 28% of all those with IFG; and 53, 57, and 62% of all those with IGT (8.1, 9.1, and 8.7% of all subjects), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
More than 96% of individuals with both IFG and IGT are likely to meet ADA consensus criteria for consideration of metformin. Because >28% of all those with IFG met the criteria, providers should perform oral glucose tolerance tests to find concomitant IGT in all patients with IFG. To the extent that our findings are representative of the U.S. population, ∼1 in 12 adults has a combination of pre-diabetes and risk factors that may justify consideration of metformin treatment for diabetes prevention.