Suppr超能文献

药房糖尿病筛查试验(PDST):一项全国性整群随机对照试验的结果,该试验比较了社区药房中三种未诊断2型糖尿病(T2DM)的筛查方法。

Pharmacy diabetes screening trial (PDST): Outcomes of a national clustered RCT comparing three screening methods for undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in community pharmacy.

作者信息

Krass Ines, Carter Rob, Mitchell Bernadette, Mohebbi Mohammadreza, Shih Sophy T F, Trinder Peta, Versace Vincent L, Wilson Frances, Mc Namara Kevin P

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Deakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.

出版信息

Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2023 Mar;197:110566. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110566. Epub 2023 Feb 3.

Abstract

AIMS

To compare the effectiveness of three pharmacy-based screening methods for type 2 diabetes (T2DM): (1) risk assessment (AUSDRISK) alone (Group A); AUSDRISK followed by a point of care test if AUSDRISK ≥12; either (2) HbA1c (Group B); or (3) small capillary blood glucose test (Group C).

METHODS

A cluster RCT with a nationally representative sample of Australian pharmacies was implemented with random allocation of eligible pharmacies to Groups A, B or C. GP referral was based on prespecified cut offs. Diagnoses were considered positive if confirmed by a GP, pathology laboratory, or national diabetes register.

RESULTS

Of the 14,093 people screened in 339 pharmacies, 3059 participants met group-specific referral criteria: 1775 (45%) (Group A); 893 (17%) (Group B); and 391 (8%) (Group C). For the total screened population rates of T2DM diagnoses were significantly higher in Group B (1.5%), compared with Groups A (< 0.8%) and C (< 0.6%) with the odds of detection in Group B compared with Group A (1.8 [1.0;3.0]), and no difference between Groups A and C.

CONCLUSIONS

In community pharmacy, the most effective method to uncover undiagnosed T2DM was a stepwise approach; initial risk assessment; and if appropriate an HbA1C POC test and referral.

摘要

目的

比较三种基于药房的2型糖尿病(T2DM)筛查方法的有效性:(1)仅进行风险评估(AUSDRISK)(A组);若AUSDRISK≥12,则在AUSDRISK之后进行即时检验;(2)糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)检测(B组);或(3)微量毛细血管血糖检测(C组)。

方法

开展一项整群随机对照试验,以具有全国代表性的澳大利亚药房样本为对象,将符合条件的药房随机分配至A、B或C组。全科医生(GP)的转诊基于预先设定的临界值。若经全科医生、病理实验室或国家糖尿病登记处确诊,则诊断为阳性。

结果

在339家药房筛查的14,093人中,3059名参与者符合特定组别的转诊标准:1775人(45%)(A组);893人(17%)(B组);391人(8%)(C组)。对于整个筛查人群,B组的T2DM诊断率(1.5%)显著高于A组(<0.8%)和C组(<0.6%),B组与A组相比的检测几率为1.8[1.0;3.0],A组和C组之间无差异。

结论

在社区药房中,发现未确诊T2DM的最有效方法是逐步进行:先进行初始风险评估;若合适则进行HbA1C即时检验并转诊。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验