Cargando…

The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes

BACKGROUND: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was adopted as a new standard criterion for diagnosing diabetes. We investigated the diagnostic utility of HbA1c by comparing the 2003 American Diabetes Association (ADA) diagnostic criteria of diabetes with HbA1c of 6.5%. Furthermore, the cut-off value for HbA1c w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Hee-Jung, Choi, Eun Young, Park, Eal Whan, Cheong, Yoo Seock, Lee, Hong-Yoen, Kim, Ji Hyun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Family Medicine 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22745876
http://dx.doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.2011.32.7.383
_version_ 1782236590095990784
author Kim, Hee-Jung
Choi, Eun Young
Park, Eal Whan
Cheong, Yoo Seock
Lee, Hong-Yoen
Kim, Ji Hyun
author_facet Kim, Hee-Jung
Choi, Eun Young
Park, Eal Whan
Cheong, Yoo Seock
Lee, Hong-Yoen
Kim, Ji Hyun
author_sort Kim, Hee-Jung
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was adopted as a new standard criterion for diagnosing diabetes. We investigated the diagnostic utility of HbA1c by comparing the 2003 American Diabetes Association (ADA) diagnostic criteria of diabetes with HbA1c of 6.5%. Furthermore, the cut-off value for HbA1c was investigated using receiver operating characteristic curves. METHODS: This study included 224 subjects without a history of diabetes that had a fasting plasma glucose level of above 100 mg/dL. The subjects had undergone a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test, and diabetes was defined as according to 2003 ADA criteria. RESULTS: The prevalence of newly diagnosed diabetes was 58.2% by the 2003 ADA criteria, and 47.8% by HbA1c of 6.5%, which underestimated the prevalence of diabetes. Compared with the 2003 ADA criteria, the sensitivity and specificity of HbA1c of 6.5% were 73.5% and 89.1%, respectively. The kappa index of agreement between 2003 ADA and HbA1c criteria was 0.60. The cut-off point of HbA1c for diagnosing diabetes was 6.45% (sensitivity, 73.3%; specificity, 88.2%; area under the curve, 0.85). HbA1c was significantly associated with fasting glucose (r = 0.82, P < 0.01), postprandial glucose (r = 0.78, P < 0.01), and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (r = 0.16, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For high risk patients whose fasting glucose was more than 100 mg/dL, HbA1c criterion underestimated the prevalence of newly diagnosed diabetes compared to the 2003 ADA criteria, and showed moderate agreement. The cut-off value for HbA1c was 6.45%, which was similar to the recommended diagnostic criterion of HbA1c by the 2009 ADA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3383149
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher The Korean Academy of Family Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33831492012-06-28 The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes Kim, Hee-Jung Choi, Eun Young Park, Eal Whan Cheong, Yoo Seock Lee, Hong-Yoen Kim, Ji Hyun Korean J Fam Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was adopted as a new standard criterion for diagnosing diabetes. We investigated the diagnostic utility of HbA1c by comparing the 2003 American Diabetes Association (ADA) diagnostic criteria of diabetes with HbA1c of 6.5%. Furthermore, the cut-off value for HbA1c was investigated using receiver operating characteristic curves. METHODS: This study included 224 subjects without a history of diabetes that had a fasting plasma glucose level of above 100 mg/dL. The subjects had undergone a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test, and diabetes was defined as according to 2003 ADA criteria. RESULTS: The prevalence of newly diagnosed diabetes was 58.2% by the 2003 ADA criteria, and 47.8% by HbA1c of 6.5%, which underestimated the prevalence of diabetes. Compared with the 2003 ADA criteria, the sensitivity and specificity of HbA1c of 6.5% were 73.5% and 89.1%, respectively. The kappa index of agreement between 2003 ADA and HbA1c criteria was 0.60. The cut-off point of HbA1c for diagnosing diabetes was 6.45% (sensitivity, 73.3%; specificity, 88.2%; area under the curve, 0.85). HbA1c was significantly associated with fasting glucose (r = 0.82, P < 0.01), postprandial glucose (r = 0.78, P < 0.01), and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (r = 0.16, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For high risk patients whose fasting glucose was more than 100 mg/dL, HbA1c criterion underestimated the prevalence of newly diagnosed diabetes compared to the 2003 ADA criteria, and showed moderate agreement. The cut-off value for HbA1c was 6.45%, which was similar to the recommended diagnostic criterion of HbA1c by the 2009 ADA. The Korean Academy of Family Medicine 2011-11 2011-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3383149/ /pubmed/22745876 http://dx.doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.2011.32.7.383 Text en Copyright © 2011 The Korean Academy of Family Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kim, Hee-Jung
Choi, Eun Young
Park, Eal Whan
Cheong, Yoo Seock
Lee, Hong-Yoen
Kim, Ji Hyun
The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title_full The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title_fullStr The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title_full_unstemmed The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title_short The Utility of HbA1c as a Diagnostic Criterion of Diabetes
title_sort utility of hba1c as a diagnostic criterion of diabetes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22745876
http://dx.doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.2011.32.7.383
work_keys_str_mv AT kimheejung theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT choieunyoung theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT parkealwhan theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT cheongyooseock theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT leehongyoen theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT kimjihyun theutilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT kimheejung utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT choieunyoung utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT parkealwhan utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT cheongyooseock utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT leehongyoen utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes
AT kimjihyun utilityofhba1casadiagnosticcriterionofdiabetes