Atlantis Evan, Ghassem Pour Shima, Girosi Federico
School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 23;8(1):e018255. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018255.
We sought to determine whether screening for anxiety and depression, an emerging risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D), adds clinically meaningful information beyond current T2D risk assessment tools.
Prospective cohort.
The 45 and Up Study is a large-scale prospective cohort of men and women aged 45 years and over, randomly sampled from the general population of New South Wales, Australia. 51 588 participants without self-reported diabetes at baseline (2006-2009) were followed up for approximately 3 years (2010).
T2D status was determined by self-reported doctor who diagnosed diabetes after the age of 30 years, and/or current use of metformin. Current symptoms of anxiety and/or depression were measured by the 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). We determined the optimal cut-off point for K10 for predicting T2D using Tjur's R2 and tested risk models with and without the K10 using logistic regression. We assessed performance measures for the incremental value of the K10 using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AROC), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and net benefit (NB) decision analytics with sensitivity analyses.
T2D developed in 1076 individuals (52.4% men). A K10 score of ≥19 (prevalence 8.97%), adjusted for age and gender, was optimal for predicting incident T2D (sensitivity 77%, specificity 53% and positive predictive value 3%; OR 1.70 (95% CI 1.41 to 2.03, P<0.001). K10 score predicted incident T2D independent of current risk models, but did not improve corresponding AROC, NRI and NB statistics. Sensitivity analyses showed that this was partially explained by the baseline model and the small effect size of the K10 that was similar compared with other risk factors.
Anxiety and depressing screening with the K10 adds no meaningful incremental value in addition to current T2D risk assessments. The clinical importance of anxiety and depression screening in preventing T2D requires ongoing consideration.
我们试图确定对焦虑和抑郁进行筛查(2型糖尿病(T2D)的一个新出现的风险因素)是否能在当前T2D风险评估工具之外提供具有临床意义的信息。
前瞻性队列研究。
“45岁及以上研究”是一项针对45岁及以上男性和女性的大规模前瞻性队列研究,从澳大利亚新南威尔士州的普通人群中随机抽样。对51588名在基线时(2006 - 2009年)无自我报告糖尿病的参与者进行了约3年(2010年)的随访。
T2D状态通过自我报告在30岁后被医生诊断为糖尿病和/或当前使用二甲双胍来确定。焦虑和/或抑郁的当前症状通过10项凯斯勒心理困扰量表(K10)进行测量。我们使用Tjur's R2确定K10预测T2D的最佳切点,并使用逻辑回归测试有和没有K10的风险模型。我们使用受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AROC)、净重新分类改善(NRI)和净效益(NB)决策分析以及敏感性分析来评估K10增量值的性能指标。
1076人(52.4%为男性)患T2D。经年龄和性别调整后,K10得分≥19(患病率8.97%)对预测T2D发病最为理想(敏感性77%,特异性53%,阳性预测值3%;OR 1.70(95%CI 1.41至2.03,P<0.001)。K10得分独立于当前风险模型预测T2D发病,但并未改善相应的AROC、NRI和NB统计量。敏感性分析表明,这部分是由基线模型以及与其他风险因素相比K10效应量较小所解释的。
除了当前的T2D风险评估外,使用K10进行焦虑和抑郁筛查没有增加有意义的增量价值。焦虑和抑郁筛查在预防T2D中的临床重要性仍需持续关注。