OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence and control of diabetes in the adult population served by the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social according to data from the National Health Survey 2000 (ENSA-2000). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data for adults from the National Health Survey 2000 was used to estimate and describe the prevalence of diabetes in the population that belongs to the social security system in Mexico. Criteria used to define diabetes mellitus were the medical diagnosis of the disease (MDDM) and the glucose measurement from capillary blood (>126 mg/dL fasting sample and 200 mg/dL in casual blood sample). If diabetes was confirmed only through blood sample, the diabetes case was define as survey finding (SF). Prevalences were estimated for both groups, while means and medians were estimated for the four possible combination groups (SF+, MDDM+, SF+, MDDM-, SF-, MDDM+, SF-, MDDM-). Sampling results were adjusted for population estimates according to the methods established in the ENSA-2000. Diabetes is described according to age, sex, education level, geographic region, background of diabetes in the family, body mass index (BMI), abdominal perimeter. A logistic regression method was used to estimate potential associations with different risk factors. RESULTS: Overall prevalence was 8.7%; for MDDM, it was 7.1%, and for SF, only 1.5%. Glycemia was highest in SF+ and MDDM-, median 292 mg/dL and in MDDM+ but SF-, median 289 mg/dL. Major risk factors were background of diabetes in both parents, abdominal obesity, low educational level age (coef. = 0.5943 per decade) and BMI (coef. = 0.0133). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes in social security population is higher than in the rest of the population, while genetic background, age, educational level, high BMI and abdominal perimeter have important influences in diabetes prevalence in this population. Glucose control is suboptimal even in patients under medical supervision.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence and control of diabetes in the adult population served by the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social according to data from the National Health Survey 2000 (ENSA-2000). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data for adults from the National Health Survey 2000 was used to estimate and describe the prevalence of diabetes in the population that belongs to the social security system in Mexico. Criteria used to define diabetes mellitus were the medical diagnosis of the disease (MDDM) and the glucose measurement from capillary blood (>126 mg/dL fasting sample and 200 mg/dL in casual blood sample). If diabetes was confirmed only through blood sample, the diabetes case was define as survey finding (SF). Prevalences were estimated for both groups, while means and medians were estimated for the four possible combination groups (SF+, MDDM+, SF+, MDDM-, SF-, MDDM+, SF-, MDDM-). Sampling results were adjusted for population estimates according to the methods established in the ENSA-2000. Diabetes is described according to age, sex, education level, geographic region, background of diabetes in the family, body mass index (BMI), abdominal perimeter. A logistic regression method was used to estimate potential associations with different risk factors. RESULTS: Overall prevalence was 8.7%; for MDDM, it was 7.1%, and for SF, only 1.5%. Glycemia was highest in SF+ and MDDM-, median 292 mg/dL and in MDDM+ but SF-, median 289 mg/dL. Major risk factors were background of diabetes in both parents, abdominal obesity, low educational level age (coef. = 0.5943 per decade) and BMI (coef. = 0.0133). CONCLUSIONS:Diabetes in social security population is higher than in the rest of the population, while genetic background, age, educational level, high BMI and abdominal perimeter have important influences in diabetes prevalence in this population. Glucose control is suboptimal even in patients under medical supervision.
Authors: Ricardo Pérez-Cuevas; Svetlana V Doubova; Magdalena Suarez-Ortega; Michael Law; Aakanksha H Pande; Jorge Escobedo; Francisco Espinosa-Larrañaga; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Anita K Wagner Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2012-06-06 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Jesus Alegre-Díaz; William Herrington; Pablo Kuri-Morales; Jonathan R Emberson; Malaquías López-Cervantes; Louisa Gnatiuc; Raul Ramirez; Michael Hill; Colin Baigent; Mark I McCarthy; Sarah Lewington; Rory Collins; Gary Whitlock; Roberto Tapia-Conyer; Richard Peto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245