Cargando…

A comparison of three different diabetes screening methods among dental patients in Turkey

Objective: This study was conducted to describe the frequency of diabetes in dental patients, and to compare three different screening methods: the random finger plasma glucose (RFPG) test, the Finnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) survey and a special clinical guideline developed for dental patien...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cevik Akyil, Rahsan, Miloglu, Ozkan, Olgun, Nermin, Sevki Bayrakdar, Ibrahim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Professional Medical Publicaitons 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24639833
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.301.4238
Descripción
Sumario:Objective: This study was conducted to describe the frequency of diabetes in dental patients, and to compare three different screening methods: the random finger plasma glucose (RFPG) test, the Finnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) survey and a special clinical guideline developed for dental patients. Methods: The study design was cross-sectional, descriptive and comparative. The data were collected between August 2011 and February 2012. A total of 702 dental patients participated in this study. The screening tools were RFPG, FINDRISC and a clinical guideline. Data were analyzed using the Chi-squared test, the t test, analysis of variance, and the Pearson correlation test. Results: The frequency of diabetes was 8.3% for the participants. The prevalence of participants at risk for undiagnosed diabetes was 20.1% according to the RFPG test, 29.9% according to the FINDRISC, and 29.8% according to the clinical guideline. Correlation analysis showed a significant positive correlation between the screening methods (p<0.001 for each). Conclusion: The overall frequency of diabetes was 8.3%. It was found that the three screening methods used in this study were statistically similar. However, FINDRISC and clinical guideline as the questionnaire screening tools indicated a little larger group than RFPG with respect to diabetes risk.