Doddamani Parveen, Ramanathan Nitin, Swetha N K, Suma M N
Department of Biochemistry, JSS Medical College and Hospital, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Bannimantap, Mysuru, Karnataka, India.
J Lab Physicians. 2021 Mar;13(1):36-43. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1727557. Epub 2021 May 24.
Diabetes risk-screening tools are validated and implemented across various countries. There is a need for improvement in these risk scores with suitable modifications so as to make them more sensitive, specific, and suitable to the local population. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of the Indian diabetes risk score (IDRS), the American diabetic association (ADA) risk score, and the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score in healthy subjects of South Indian origin in predicting the risk of diabetes and to correlate these risk scores with the blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in the study population. A total of 160 subjects attending the master health checkup/outpatient department of a tertiary care hospital were included in the study. Each subject was asked to fill a questionnaire. Details obtained using the questionnaire were assessed as per the three diabetic risk scores. Fasting blood sugar/random blood sugar and HbA1c were estimated. Data analysis was done using SPSS 22/23. Pearson correlation was used to compare continuous variables, with < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and Mitchell's clinical utility indices were calculated for each risk tool. We found the prevalence of diabetes to be 11.9%. ADA risk score was the only risk score that showed a statistically significant difference ( -value = 0.05) between the low- and high-risk subjects. ADA or IDRS risk scores can be used for screening diabetes in the South Indian population. We suggest that inclusion of the history of gestational diabetes and hypertension in the IDRS risk score might improve its sensitivity as a screening tool in our local population.
糖尿病风险筛查工具在各个国家都经过了验证并得以应用。需要对这些风险评分进行适当修改以加以改进，使其更具敏感性、特异性，并适用于当地人群。
本研究的目的是评估和比较印度糖尿病风险评分（IDRS）、美国糖尿病协会（ADA）风险评分和芬兰糖尿病风险评分在南印度裔健康受试者中预测糖尿病风险的诊断准确性和临床实用性，并将这些风险评分与研究人群的血糖和糖化血红蛋白（HbA1c）水平进行关联。
共有160名在三级医院进行全面健康检查/门诊就诊的受试者纳入研究。每位受试者都被要求填写一份问卷。根据三种糖尿病风险评分对通过问卷获得的详细信息进行评估。测定空腹血糖/随机血糖和HbA1c。
使用SPSS 22/23进行数据分析。采用Pearson相关性分析比较连续变量，P<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。计算每种风险工具的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、阳性似然比、阴性似然比和米切尔临床实用性指数。
我们发现糖尿病患病率为11.9%。ADA风险评分是唯一在低风险和高风险受试者之间显示出统计学显著差异（P值=0.05）的风险评分。
ADA或IDRS风险评分可用于南印度人群的糖尿病筛查。我们建议在IDRS风险评分中纳入妊娠期糖尿病和高血压病史，可能会提高其作为我们当地人群筛查工具的敏感性。
