The Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Department of Health Evidence and Policy, New York, New York (West, Horowitz)
UCLA School of Public Health, Department of Health Services, Los Angeles, Californian (Parikh)
Diabetes Educ. 2010 Nov-Dec;36(6):887-93. doi: 10.1177/0145721710386973. Epub 2010 Nov 1.
Community-based diabetes screening is common, but its impact on health outcomes is unclear. Screening protocols may not be standardized nor reflect current clinical practice. A community and clinical team examined the quality and consistency of community-based screening to diagnose hyperglycemic states, and it developed a bilingual screening tool to allow screeners to present accurate, actionable results to participants.
The team interviewed providers and community members, analyzed forms and educational materials utilized by screeners, and observed local diabetes screening events. Researchers compared glucose parameters used by screeners to published guidelines and observed fingerstick techniques and protocols for education, referral, and follow-up. Screening was divided into 3 phases: participant assessment before testing, obtainment of a sample, and interpretation of and counsel about results.
There was a general lack of consistency in diabetes screening practices at the 12 screenings attended and among the 11 screeners interviewed. Assessment rarely included evaluation of diabetes risk factors or recent caloric intake. Obtaining a sample through fingersticks often included practices known to cause discomfort and decrease accuracy of glucose measurements. Criteria used to categorize results as "normal" or "abnormal" rarely followed published guidelines for laboratory-measured glucose values and varied significantly between screeners. No organization mentioned prediabetes in screenings. Postscreening consultation protocols varied widely.
Inconsistencies and inaccuracies in screening practices may limit the quality and relevance of community-based diabetes screenings. The impact of local screenings may be enhanced by using a tool that includes concrete steps and precise guidelines.
社区为基础的糖尿病筛查很常见,但它对健康结果的影响尚不清楚。筛查方案可能没有标准化,也不能反映当前的临床实践。一个社区和临床团队检查了社区为基础的筛查质量和一致性,以诊断高血糖状态,并开发了一种双语筛查工具,使筛查者能够向参与者提供准确、可操作的结果。
该团队采访了提供者和社区成员,分析了筛查者使用的表格和教育材料,并观察了当地的糖尿病筛查活动。研究人员将筛查者使用的血糖参数与已发表的指南进行了比较,并观察了指尖采血技术和用于教育、转介和随访的方案。筛查分为三个阶段:测试前对参与者的评估、样本的获取以及对结果的解释和咨询。
在所参加的 12 次筛查和接受采访的 11 名筛查者中,糖尿病筛查实践普遍缺乏一致性。评估很少包括对糖尿病危险因素或最近热量摄入的评估。通过指尖采血获取样本通常包括已知会引起不适和降低血糖测量准确性的操作。将结果分类为“正常”或“异常”的标准很少遵循实验室测量血糖值的已发表指南,并且在筛查者之间差异很大。没有筛查提到糖尿病前期。筛查后的咨询方案差异很大。
筛查实践中的不一致和不准确性可能会限制社区为基础的糖尿病筛查的质量和相关性。使用包括具体步骤和精确指南的工具可以增强当地筛查的效果。