Davidson Mayer B, Pan Deyu
Charles R. Drew University, Los Angeles, California.
Charles R. Drew University, Los Angeles, California.
J Diabetes Complications. 2014 Jul-Aug;28(4):464-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2014.03.016. Epub 2014 Apr 2.
To compare the prevalence of diabetes by history and using the fasting plasma glucose (FPG) criterion alone, the HbA1c criterion alone or either one in those not known to have diabetes.
Analysis of NHANES population ≥20years old from 1999 through 2010.
In those diagnosed by laboratory tests, 86% met the FPG criterion and 53% met the HbA1c criterion. The prevalence of diabetes (history or laboratory test) was significantly increased when the FPG criterion was used compared with the HbA1c criterion in the entire (11.5% vs 10.5%, P=0.018) and Caucasian (10.6% vs 9.2%, P=0.022) populations. In contrast, there were no significant differences in the prevalence when only the FPG criterion was used compared with only the HbA1c criterion in Hispanics (12.9% vs 12.1% P=0.386) and African Americans (14.5 vs 14.3%, P=0.960). Using history and either criterion in those not known to have it, diabetes increased by 61% in this 12year period in adults ≥20years old.
Using the FPG rather than the HbA1c criterion to diagnose diabetes in those without a history significantly increased the total prevalence of diabetes in Caucasians but not in African Americans or Hispanics.
比较仅依据病史、仅使用空腹血糖（FPG）标准、仅使用糖化血红蛋白（HbA1c）标准或在不知患有糖尿病的人群中使用上述任一标准时糖尿病的患病率。
分析1999年至2010年美国国家健康与营养检查调查（NHANES）中年龄≥20岁的人群。
在通过实验室检测确诊的人群中，86%符合FPG标准，53%符合HbA1c标准。在总体人群（11.5%对10.5%，P = 0.018）和白种人群（10.6%对9.2%，P = 0.022）中，使用FPG标准时糖尿病（有病史或实验室检测确诊）的患病率相比使用HbA1c标准时显著升高。相比之下，在西班牙裔人群（12.9%对12.1%，P = 0.386）和非裔美国人（14.5%对14.3%，P = 0.960）中，仅使用FPG标准与仅使用HbA1c标准时的患病率无显著差异。在不知患有糖尿病的人群中使用病史及上述任一标准，≥20岁成年人在这12年期间糖尿病患病率增加了61%。
在无糖尿病病史的人群中，使用FPG而非HbA1c标准诊断糖尿病显著增加了白种人群中糖尿病的总体患病率，但在非裔美国人或西班牙裔人群中未出现这种情况。
