BACKGROUND: Although whole population screening for type 2 diabetes is not currently considered to be justified, targeted screening within higher risk groups may be more cost-effective, and more pragmatic. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to investigate the feasibility and performance of a pragmatic system for identifying patients with type 2 diabetes and impaired fasting glycaemia (IFG). METHODS: A clustered observational survey of the prevalence of diabetes and IFG was carried out in randomly selected patients from four at-risk groups. Patients were identified by computerized searching of practice databases for age and body mass index (BMI) risk criteria. Sixteen practices in South West England screened 1287 Caucasian patients from four groups with progressive levels of theoretical risk (age >70 and BMI >or=33, age >65 and BMI >or=31, age >60 and BMI >or=29, and age >50 and BMI >or=27). Fasting plasma glucose was measured and repeated if abnormal to determine the prevalence of new cases in each group. BMI and age data were validated against measures taken at the clinic. RESULTS: The response rate was 60.6% and the prevalence of new cases of type 2 diabetes in each group was 4.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-7.7], 5.7% (95% CI 4.0-8.2), 3.8% (95% CI 2.4-6.0) and 2.6% (95%CI 1.4-4.7), respectively. An additional 5.2-8.4% had IFG. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted screening by searching existing GP records for age and BMI criteria is feasible for use in general practice in the UK. Screening of patients with a BMI of >or=27 and aged >50 by fasting glucose identified a substantial prevalence of undetected type 2 diabetes and IFG. The relative costs and benefits as well as the pragmatic advantages of different systems need further evaluation.
BACKGROUND: Although whole population screening for type 2 diabetes is not currently considered to be justified, targeted screening within higher risk groups may be more cost-effective, and more pragmatic. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to investigate the feasibility and performance of a pragmatic system for identifying patients with type 2 diabetes and impaired fasting glycaemia (IFG). METHODS: A clustered observational survey of the prevalence of diabetes and IFG was carried out in randomly selected patients from four at-risk groups. Patients were identified by computerized searching of practice databases for age and body mass index (BMI) risk criteria. Sixteen practices in South West England screened 1287 Caucasian patients from four groups with progressive levels of theoretical risk (age >70 and BMI >or=33, age >65 and BMI >or=31, age >60 and BMI >or=29, and age >50 and BMI >or=27). Fasting plasma glucose was measured and repeated if abnormal to determine the prevalence of new cases in each group. BMI and age data were validated against measures taken at the clinic. RESULTS: The response rate was 60.6% and the prevalence of new cases of type 2 diabetes in each group was 4.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-7.7], 5.7% (95% CI 4.0-8.2), 3.8% (95% CI 2.4-6.0) and 2.6% (95%CI 1.4-4.7), respectively. An additional 5.2-8.4% had IFG. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted screening by searching existing GP records for age and BMI criteria is feasible for use in general practice in the UK. Screening of patients with a BMI of >or=27 and aged >50 by fasting glucose identified a substantial prevalence of undetected type 2 diabetes and IFG. The relative costs and benefits as well as the pragmatic advantages of different systems need further evaluation.
Authors: Erwin P Klein Woolthuis; Wim J C de Grauw; Willem H E M van Gerwen; Henk J M van den Hoogen; Eloy H van de Lisdonk; Job F M Metsemakers; Chris van Weel Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2009 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Cristina Soguero-Ruiz; Inmaculada Mora-Jiménez; Miguel A Mohedano-Munoz; Manuel Rubio-Sanchez; Pablo de Miguel-Bohoyo; Alberto Sanchez Journal: BMC Bioinformatics Date: 2020-03-11 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Jonathan Graffy; Julie Grant; Kate Williams; Simon Cohn; Sara Macbay; Simon Griffin; Ann Louise Kinmonth Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2010-04-19 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Chris Barclay; Kimberley L Procter; Robert Glendenning; Peter Marsh; Jenny Freeman; Nigel Mathers Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: L A Sargeant; R K Simmons; R S Barling; R Butler; K M Williams; A T Prevost; A L Kinmonth; N J Wareham; S J Griffin Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Irene G M van Valkengoed; Everlina M A Vlaar; Vera Nierkens; Barend J C Middelkoop; Karien Stronks Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Emma Ray; David Culliford; Helen Kruk; Kate Gillett; Mal North; Carla M Astles; Alexander Hicks; Matthew Johnson; Sharon Xiaowen Lin; Rosanna Orlando; Mike Thomas; Rachel E Jordan; David Price; Mita Konstantin; Tom M A Wilkinson Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 2.871