Cargando…

Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study

INTRODUCTION: Does rural status influence glycemic outcomes among participants in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange clinic registry? RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry between January 2016 and March 2018 were identified by rural–urban status and stratified by age...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gill, Arashpreet, Gothard, M David, Briggs Early, Kathaleen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8768930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35042753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2021-002564
_version_ 1784635024025321472
author Gill, Arashpreet
Gothard, M David
Briggs Early, Kathaleen
author_facet Gill, Arashpreet
Gothard, M David
Briggs Early, Kathaleen
author_sort Gill, Arashpreet
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Does rural status influence glycemic outcomes among participants in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange clinic registry? RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry between January 2016 and March 2018 were identified by rural–urban status and stratified by age and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Multivariable regression modeling was performed to isolate HbA1c differences. A full model including all significant (p<0.05 via two-sided testing) differential factors was determined with an additional indicator for rural status, and adjusted for duration of diabetes, use of continuous glucose monitoring device, age, race/ethnicity, and private insurance status. The model was reduced using backwards elimination stepwise procedures until only significant factors remained. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c levels for all rural participants were significantly higher (8.71%; 72 mmol/mol) compared with the urban group (8.48%; 69 mmol/mol), p<0.001. For youth under 13 years of age, rural participants had a higher mean HbA1c (8.65%; 71 mmol/mol) compared with urban (8.45% 69 mmol/mol), p=0.022. Rural youth (13–<18 years) had a higher mean HbA1c (9.39%; 79 mmol/mol) than urban youth (9.14%; 76 mmol/mol), p<0.001. Rural young adults (18–<26 years) had a higher mean HbA1c (9.07%; 76 mmol/mol) than urban young adults (8.88%; 74 mmol/mol), p=0.042. Rural adults (≥26 years; n=589) were the only group that did not have a higher mean HbA1c (7.76%, 61.3 mmol) than urban adults (n=4770; 7.72%, 60.9 mmol/mol), p=0.503. Rural locale was highly significant (beta=0.175, p<0.001) despite controlling for potentially confounding differences between rural and urban groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among this T1D Exchange cohort, there is a pattern of higher mean HbA1c being associated with rural status, even after adjustment for characteristic differences, most strikingly among those under 26 years of age. This disparity and contributing factors need to be more thoroughly studied to provide effective solutions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8768930
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87689302022-02-04 Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study Gill, Arashpreet Gothard, M David Briggs Early, Kathaleen BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Epidemiology/Health services research INTRODUCTION: Does rural status influence glycemic outcomes among participants in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange clinic registry? RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry between January 2016 and March 2018 were identified by rural–urban status and stratified by age and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Multivariable regression modeling was performed to isolate HbA1c differences. A full model including all significant (p<0.05 via two-sided testing) differential factors was determined with an additional indicator for rural status, and adjusted for duration of diabetes, use of continuous glucose monitoring device, age, race/ethnicity, and private insurance status. The model was reduced using backwards elimination stepwise procedures until only significant factors remained. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c levels for all rural participants were significantly higher (8.71%; 72 mmol/mol) compared with the urban group (8.48%; 69 mmol/mol), p<0.001. For youth under 13 years of age, rural participants had a higher mean HbA1c (8.65%; 71 mmol/mol) compared with urban (8.45% 69 mmol/mol), p=0.022. Rural youth (13–<18 years) had a higher mean HbA1c (9.39%; 79 mmol/mol) than urban youth (9.14%; 76 mmol/mol), p<0.001. Rural young adults (18–<26 years) had a higher mean HbA1c (9.07%; 76 mmol/mol) than urban young adults (8.88%; 74 mmol/mol), p=0.042. Rural adults (≥26 years; n=589) were the only group that did not have a higher mean HbA1c (7.76%, 61.3 mmol) than urban adults (n=4770; 7.72%, 60.9 mmol/mol), p=0.503. Rural locale was highly significant (beta=0.175, p<0.001) despite controlling for potentially confounding differences between rural and urban groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among this T1D Exchange cohort, there is a pattern of higher mean HbA1c being associated with rural status, even after adjustment for characteristic differences, most strikingly among those under 26 years of age. This disparity and contributing factors need to be more thoroughly studied to provide effective solutions. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8768930/ /pubmed/35042753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2021-002564 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Epidemiology/Health services research
Gill, Arashpreet
Gothard, M David
Briggs Early, Kathaleen
Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title_full Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title_fullStr Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title_short Glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes T1D Exchange registry, January 2016–March 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
title_sort glycemic outcomes among rural patients in the type 1 diabetes t1d exchange registry, january 2016–march 2018: a cross-sectional cohort study
topic Epidemiology/Health services research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8768930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35042753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2021-002564
work_keys_str_mv AT gillarashpreet glycemicoutcomesamongruralpatientsinthetype1diabetest1dexchangeregistryjanuary2016march2018acrosssectionalcohortstudy
AT gothardmdavid glycemicoutcomesamongruralpatientsinthetype1diabetest1dexchangeregistryjanuary2016march2018acrosssectionalcohortstudy
AT briggsearlykathaleen glycemicoutcomesamongruralpatientsinthetype1diabetest1dexchangeregistryjanuary2016march2018acrosssectionalcohortstudy