BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The primary care sector is of key importance for the management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The authors investigated (a) the prevalence of diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2, (b) the type and frequency of non-drug and drug treatment and its association with the presence of diabetic complications, and (c) the quality of metabolic control by HbA1c. METHODS: Using a nationwide probability sample of 3,188 general practices (response rate [RR] 50.6%), a total of 55,518 (RR 93.5%) patients were assessed in a prospective cross-sectional study by their physicians in September 2003 in a standardized manner using questionnaires, physician interview, and laboratory assessments. In addition to diabetes mellitus, 28 diseases were explicitly screened for, among them typical macrovascular (coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease) and microvascular disease (neuropathy, nephropathy, retinopathy, diabetic foot) complications. RESULTS: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 0.5% (type 1) and 14.7% (type 2), respectively. 49.5% (type 1) and 50.2% (type 2) of patients had micro- or macrovascular complications. 6.8% did not receive any treatment, 13.5% received non-drug treatment, and 75.3% received oral antidiabetic drugs and/or insulin (26.6% a combination of two or more). Compared to diabetics without any complications, treatment intensity was significantly higher in patients with microvascular complications (odds ratio [OR] 3.02), but not in those with macrovascular complications only (OR 0.98). An HbA1c value>or=7.0% was recorded in 39.6% of patients. CONCLUSION: Compared to previous studies in this setting, the proportion of diabetics with drug treatment has increased. More patients receive antidiabetic drug combinations. Quality of blood sugar control appears to have improved as well.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The primary care sector is of key importance for the management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The authors investigated (a) the prevalence of diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2, (b) the type and frequency of non-drug and drug treatment and its association with the presence of diabetic complications, and (c) the quality of metabolic control by HbA1c. METHODS: Using a nationwide probability sample of 3,188 general practices (response rate [RR] 50.6%), a total of 55,518 (RR 93.5%) patients were assessed in a prospective cross-sectional study by their physicians in September 2003 in a standardized manner using questionnaires, physician interview, and laboratory assessments. In addition to diabetes mellitus, 28 diseases were explicitly screened for, among them typical macrovascular (coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease) and microvascular disease (neuropathy, nephropathy, retinopathy, diabetic foot) complications. RESULTS: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 0.5% (type 1) and 14.7% (type 2), respectively. 49.5% (type 1) and 50.2% (type 2) of patients had micro- or macrovascular complications. 6.8% did not receive any treatment, 13.5% received non-drug treatment, and 75.3% received oral antidiabetic drugs and/or insulin (26.6% a combination of two or more). Compared to diabetics without any complications, treatment intensity was significantly higher in patients with microvascular complications (odds ratio [OR] 3.02), but not in those with macrovascular complications only (OR 0.98). An HbA1c value>or=7.0% was recorded in 39.6% of patients. CONCLUSION: Compared to previous studies in this setting, the proportion of diabetics with drug treatment has increased. More patients receive antidiabetic drug combinations. Quality of blood sugar control appears to have improved as well.
Authors: J Klotsche; D M Leistner; L Pieper; D Pittrow; A M Zeiher; H-U Wittchen Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Ingmar Schäfer; Claudia Küver; Benjamin Gedrose; Falk Hoffmann; Barbara Russ-Thiel; Hans-Peter Brose; Hendrik van den Bussche; Hanna Kaduszkiewicz Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Yong Du; Christin Heidemann; Antje Gößwald; Patrick Schmich; Christa Scheidt-Nave Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-02-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Werner A Scherbaum; Gordon Goodall; Katrina M Erny-Albrecht; Massimo Massi-Benedetti; Erland Erdmann; William J Valentine Journal: Cost Eff Resour Alloc Date: 2009-05-05