Cargando…

Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To estimate how many U.S. adults with diabetes would be eligible for individualized A1C targets based on 1) the 2012 American Diabetes Association (ADA) guideline and 2) a published approach for individualized target ranges. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied adults with diabetes ≥20...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Laiteerapong, Neda, John, Priya M., Nathan, Aviva G., Huang, Elbert S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Diabetes Association 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526201/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22961575
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-2344
_version_ 1782253517556154368
author Laiteerapong, Neda
John, Priya M.
Nathan, Aviva G.
Huang, Elbert S.
author_facet Laiteerapong, Neda
John, Priya M.
Nathan, Aviva G.
Huang, Elbert S.
author_sort Laiteerapong, Neda
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To estimate how many U.S. adults with diabetes would be eligible for individualized A1C targets based on 1) the 2012 American Diabetes Association (ADA) guideline and 2) a published approach for individualized target ranges. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied adults with diabetes ≥20 years of age from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007–2008 (n = 757). We assigned A1C targets based on duration, age, diabetes-related complications, and comorbid conditions according to 1) the ADA guideline and 2) a strategy by Ismail-Beigi focused on setting target ranges. We estimated the number and proportion of adults with each A1C target and compared individualized targets to measured levels. RESULTS: Using ADA guideline recommendations, 31% (95% CI 27–34%) of the U.S. adult diabetes population would have recommended A1C targets of <7.0%, and 69% (95% CI 66–73%) would have A1C targets less stringent than <7.0%. Using the Ismail-Beigi strategy, 56% (51–61%) would have an A1C target of ≤7.0%, and 44% (39–49%) would have A1C targets less stringent than <7.0%. If a universal A1C <7.0% target were applied, 47% (41–54%) of adults with diabetes would have inadequate glycemic control; this proportion declined to 30% (26–36%) with the ADA guideline and 31% (27–36%) with the Ismail-Beigi strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Using individualized glycemic targets, about half of U.S. adults with diabetes would have recommended A1C targets of ≥7.0% but one-third would still be considered inadequately controlled. Diabetes research and performance measurement goals will need to be revised in order to encourage the individualization of glycemic targets.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3526201
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher American Diabetes Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35262012014-01-01 Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes Laiteerapong, Neda John, Priya M. Nathan, Aviva G. Huang, Elbert S. Diabetes Care Original Research OBJECTIVE: To estimate how many U.S. adults with diabetes would be eligible for individualized A1C targets based on 1) the 2012 American Diabetes Association (ADA) guideline and 2) a published approach for individualized target ranges. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied adults with diabetes ≥20 years of age from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007–2008 (n = 757). We assigned A1C targets based on duration, age, diabetes-related complications, and comorbid conditions according to 1) the ADA guideline and 2) a strategy by Ismail-Beigi focused on setting target ranges. We estimated the number and proportion of adults with each A1C target and compared individualized targets to measured levels. RESULTS: Using ADA guideline recommendations, 31% (95% CI 27–34%) of the U.S. adult diabetes population would have recommended A1C targets of <7.0%, and 69% (95% CI 66–73%) would have A1C targets less stringent than <7.0%. Using the Ismail-Beigi strategy, 56% (51–61%) would have an A1C target of ≤7.0%, and 44% (39–49%) would have A1C targets less stringent than <7.0%. If a universal A1C <7.0% target were applied, 47% (41–54%) of adults with diabetes would have inadequate glycemic control; this proportion declined to 30% (26–36%) with the ADA guideline and 31% (27–36%) with the Ismail-Beigi strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Using individualized glycemic targets, about half of U.S. adults with diabetes would have recommended A1C targets of ≥7.0% but one-third would still be considered inadequately controlled. Diabetes research and performance measurement goals will need to be revised in order to encourage the individualization of glycemic targets. American Diabetes Association 2013-01 2012-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3526201/ /pubmed/22961575 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-2344 Text en © 2013 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.
spellingShingle Original Research
Laiteerapong, Neda
John, Priya M.
Nathan, Aviva G.
Huang, Elbert S.
Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title_full Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title_fullStr Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title_full_unstemmed Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title_short Public Health Implications of Recommendations to Individualize Glycemic Targets in Adults With Diabetes
title_sort public health implications of recommendations to individualize glycemic targets in adults with diabetes
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526201/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22961575
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-2344
work_keys_str_mv AT laiteerapongneda publichealthimplicationsofrecommendationstoindividualizeglycemictargetsinadultswithdiabetes
AT johnpriyam publichealthimplicationsofrecommendationstoindividualizeglycemictargetsinadultswithdiabetes
AT nathanavivag publichealthimplicationsofrecommendationstoindividualizeglycemictargetsinadultswithdiabetes
AT huangelberts publichealthimplicationsofrecommendationstoindividualizeglycemictargetsinadultswithdiabetes