-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE
Using a nationally representative sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population, we estimated prediabetes prevalence and its changes during 1999-2010.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Data were from 19,182 nonpregnant individuals aged ≥12 years who participated in the 1999-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. We defined prediabetes as hemoglobin A1c 5.7 to <6.5% (39 to <48 mmol/mol, A1C5.7) or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 100 to <126 mg/dL (impaired fasting glucose [IFG]). We estimated the prevalence of prediabetes, A1C5.7, and IFG for 1999-2002, 2003-2006, and 2007-2010. We calculated estimates age-standardized to the 2000 U.S. census population and used logistic regression to compute estimates adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty-to-income ratio, and BMI. Participants with self-reported diabetes, A1C ≥6.5% (≥48 mmol/mol), or FPG ≥126 mg/dL were included.RESULTSAmong those aged ≥12 years, age-adjusted prediabetes prevalence increased from 27.4% (95% CI 25.1-29.7) in 1999-2002 to 34.1% (32.5-35.8) in 2007-2010. Among adults aged ≥18 years, the prevalence increased from 29.2% (26.8-31.8) to 36.2% (34.5-38.0). As single measures among individuals aged ≥12 years, A1C5.7 prevalence increased from 9.5% (8.4-10.8) to 17.8% (16.6-19.0), a relative increase of 87%, whereas IFG remained stable. These prevalence changes were similar among the total population, across subgroups, and after controlling for covariates.CONCLUSIONS
During 1999-2010, U.S. prediabetes prevalence increased because of increases in A1C5.7. Continuous monitoring of prediabetes is needed to identify, quantify, and characterize the population of high-risk individuals targeted for ongoing diabetes primary prevention efforts.
Diabetes care 04/2013; · 8.09 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: With increasing life expectancy in the U.S., it is important to know whether a longer life expectancy means a longer healthy life span or a prolonged period of later-life morbidity. This study examines changes in lifetime without diabetes, a leading cause of morbidity in later life.
Using demographic methods and nationally representative data, we estimated changes in diabetes-free life expectancy between 1980-1989 and 2000-2004 for adult men and women in the U.S., estimated the contribution of changes in age-specific diabetes rates, and examined the changing effects of weight status on diabetes risks.
While life expectancy at age 18 for men and women increased between the 1980s and the 2000s, diabetes-free life expectancy at age 18 decreased by 1.7 years for men and 1.5 years for women. The proportion of 18-year-olds who would develop diabetes in their lifetimes increased by almost 50% among women and almost doubled among men. Obese individuals experienced the greatest losses in diabetes-free life expectancy during this period, estimated at 5.6 years for men and 2.5 years for women.
Diabetes-free life expectancy decreased for both men and women between 1980-1989 and 2000-2004, and these decreases are almost entirely attributable to large increases in diabetes incidence among obese individuals.
Diabetes care 10/2011; 34(10):2225-30. · 8.09 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To compare the prevalence of prediabetes using A1C, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) criteria, and to examine the degree of agreement between the measures.
We used the 2005-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to classify 3,627 adults aged ≥ 18 years without diabetes according to their prediabetes status using A1C, FPG, and OGTT. We compared the prevalence of prediabetes according to different measures and used conditional probabilities to examine agreement between measures.
In 2005-2008, the crude prevalence of prediabetes in adults aged ≥ 18 years was 14.2% for A1C 5.7-6.4% (A1C5.7), 26.2% for FPG 100-125 mg/dL (IFG100), 7.0% for FPG 110-125 mg/dL (IFG110), and 13.7% for OGTT 140-199 mg/dL (IGT). Prediabetes prevalence varied by age, sex, and race/ethnicity, and there was considerable discordance between measures of prediabetes. Among those with IGT, 58.2, 23.4, and 32.3% had IFG100, IFG110, and A1C5.7, respectively, and 67.1% had the combination of either A1C5.7 or IFG100.
The prevalence of prediabetes varied by the indicator used to measure risk; there was considerable discordance between indicators and the characteristics of individuals with prediabetes. Programs to prevent diabetes may need to consider issues of equity, resources, need, and efficiency in targeting their efforts.
Diabetes care 02/2011; 34(2):387-91. · 8.09 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To estimate the percent and number of overweight adults in the U.S. with prediabetes who would be potential candidates for diabetes prevention as per the American Diabetes Association Position Statement (12).
We analyzed data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III; 1988-1994) and projected our estimates to the year 2000. We defined impaired glucose tolerance (IGT; 2-h glucose 140-199 mg/dl), impaired fasting glucose (IFG; fasting glucose 110-125 mg/dl), and prediabetes (IGT or IFG) per American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria. The ADA recently recommended that all overweight people (BMI >or=25 kg/m(2)) who are >or=45 years of age with prediabetes could be potential candidates for diabetes prevention, as could prediabetic people aged >25 years with risk factors. In NHANES III, 2-h postload glucose concentrations were done only among subjects aged 40-74 years. Because we were interested in overweight people who had both the 2-h glucose and fasting glucose tests, we limited our estimates of IGT, IFG, and prediabetes to those aged 45-74 years. RESULTS-Overall, 17.1% of overweight adults aged 45-74 years had IGT, 11.9% had IFG, 22.6% had prediabetes, and 5.6% had both IGT and IFG. Based on those data, we estimated that in the year 2000, 9.1 million overweight adults aged 45-74 had IGT, 5.8 million had IFG, 11.9 million had prediabetes, and 3.0 million had IGT and IFG.
Almost 12 million overweight individuals aged 45-74 years in the U.S. may benefit from diabetes prevention interventions. The number will be substantially higher if estimation is extended to individuals aged >75 and 25-44 years.
Diabetes Care 04/2003; 26(3):645-9. · 8.09 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Recent guidelines and clinical trial results emphasize the importance of controlling blood pressure among people with diabetes. We estimated the prevalence of elevated blood pressure among U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes, and examined the extent to which elevated blood pressure is being treated and controlled.
The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988-1994), a probability survey of the civilian, non-institutionalized population of the United States, consisted of an interview and physical examination, which included blood pressure measurement. Survey participants included 1507 adults (aged > or = 18 years) with self-reported diabetes. Among people with self-reported diabetes, we estimated elevated blood pressure (mean blood pressure of > or = 130/85 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive medication); awareness (prior diagnosis of hypertension); treatment (antihypertensive medication use); and control (mean blood pressure of <130/85 or <140/90).
In the 1988-1994 period, 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]=+/-4.4%) of all U.S. adults with diabetes had elevated blood pressure. The prevalence of elevated blood pressure increased with age and was high among both men and women and among Mexican Americans, non-Hispanic blacks, and non-Hispanic whites. Among those with elevated blood pressure, 71% (95% CI=+/-4.1%) were aware and 57% (95% CI=+/-4.2%) were treated, but only 12% (95% CI=+/-3.2%) had mean blood pressure <130/85 and 45% (95% CI=+/-4.9%) had mean blood pressure <140/90. Control of blood pressure was least common among older people.
All people with diabetes-regardless of age, gender, and race and ethnicity-may benefit from efforts to prevent hypertension. The control of elevated blood pressure is inadequate and broad-based efforts are needed to improve blood pressure control.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine 01/2002; 22(1):42-8. · 4.04 Impact Factor
