Suppr超能文献

成人糖尿病患者心血管风险因素管理的区域性差异:对糖尿病协作登记处的评估。

Regional differences in the management of cardiovascular risk factors among adults with diabetes: An evaluation of the Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

机构信息

Clinical, Behavioral, and Outcomes Research Section, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Division of Cardiology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Diabetes Complications. 2020 Aug;34(8):107591. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2020.107591. Epub 2020 Apr 21.

Abstract

AIMS

To compare cardiovascular risk factor control in adults with diabetes participating in a national diabetes registry to those in the general population and to ascertain regional differences in diabetes care.

METHODS

Adults with diagnosed diabetes in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR) were compared with those in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2015 to 2016; standardized mean difference (SMD) > 0.2 defined significance. Regional differences were assessed in the DCR cohort; p < .05 defined significance.

RESULTS

The DCR cohort was older (61 vs. 57 years, SMD = 0.38), more insured (99.7% vs. 91.0%, SMD = 0.42), and less ethnically diverse (83% non-Hispanic white vs. 76%, SMD = 0.30) compared with NHANES. The proportion of overweight/obesity, A1c < 7% (<53 mmol/mol), and BP < 140/90 were similar, but DCR participants had higher proportion with LDL < 2.59 mmol/L (61% vs. 41%, SMD = 0.39) and fewer tobacco users (17% vs. 32%, SMD = 0.35). Regionally, obesity, lack of glycaemic control, and tobacco use were highest in the Midwest, BP control was the lowest in the South, and LDL control was lowest in the Northeast.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant regional differences in diabetes care delivery and outcomes were identified using a national diabetes registry. Serial analyses of the DCR may supplement national evaluations to deepen our understanding of diabetes care in the US.

摘要

目的

将参与国家糖尿病注册中心的成年糖尿病患者的心血管危险因素控制情况与普通人群进行比较,并确定糖尿病护理方面的地区差异。

方法

将糖尿病合作注册中心(DCR)中的成年糖尿病患者与 2015 年至 2016 年期间的国家健康与营养检查调查(NHANES)中的患者进行比较;标准化均数差值(SMD)>0.2 定义为有显著差异。在 DCR 队列中评估区域差异;p<0.05 定义为有显著差异。

结果

与 NHANES 相比,DCR 队列患者年龄更大(61 岁 vs. 57 岁,SMD=0.38)、参保率更高(99.7% vs. 91.0%,SMD=0.42)、种族多样性更低(83%非西班牙裔白人 vs. 76%,SMD=0.30)。超重/肥胖、A1c<7%(<53mmol/mol)和血压<140/90 的比例相似,但 DCR 参与者 LDL<2.59mmol/L(61% vs. 41%,SMD=0.39)的比例更高,且吸烟人数更少(17% vs. 32%,SMD=0.35)。从区域来看,中西部地区的肥胖、血糖控制不佳和吸烟率最高,南部地区的血压控制最差,东北部地区的 LDL 控制最差。

结论

使用国家糖尿病注册中心发现了糖尿病护理提供和结果方面的显著地区差异。对 DCR 的连续分析可能会补充国家评估,以加深我们对美国糖尿病护理的理解。

相似文献

7

引用本文的文献

1
Six Digital Health Technologies That Will Transform Diabetes.六种将改变糖尿病的数字健康技术。
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023 Jan;17(1):239-249. doi: 10.1177/19322968211043498. Epub 2021 Sep 24.

本文引用的文献

3
Addressing Clinical Inertia in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Review.解决 2 型糖尿病治疗惰性问题:综述
Adv Ther. 2018 Nov;35(11):1735-1745. doi: 10.1007/s12325-018-0819-5. Epub 2018 Oct 29.
4
Advancing Measurement of Diabetes at the Population Level.推进人群层面的糖尿病测量。
Curr Diab Rep. 2018 Sep 19;18(11):108. doi: 10.1007/s11892-018-1088-z.
6
Health Care Spending on Diabetes in the U.S., 1996-2013.美国 1996-2013 年糖尿病医疗保健支出
Diabetes Care. 2018 Jul;41(7):1423-1431. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1376. Epub 2018 May 10.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验