BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Diabetes and hypertension impart approximately the same increased relative risk for stroke, although hypertension has a larger population-attributable risk because of its higher population prevalence. With a growing epidemic of obesity and associated increasing prevalence of diabetes that disproportionately impacts the southeastern Stroke Belt states, any potential contribution of diabetes to the geographic disparity in stroke mortality will only increase. METHODS: Racial and geographic differences in diabetes prevalence and diabetes awareness, treatment, and control were assessed in the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study, a national population-based cohort of black and white participants older than 45 years of age. At the time of this report, 21 959 had been enrolled. RESULTS: The odds of diabetes were significantly increased in both white and black residents of the stroke buckle (OR, 1.26; [1.10, 1.44]; OR, 1.45 [1.26, 1.66], respectively) and Stroke Belt (OR, 1.22; [1.09, 1.36]; OR, 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]) compared to the rest of the United States. In the buckle, regional differences were not fully mediated and remained significant when controlling for socioeconomic status and risk factors. Addition of hypertension to the models did not reduce the magnitude of the associations. There were no significant differences by region with regard to awareness, treatment, or control for either race. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses support a possible role of regional variation in the prevalence of diabetes as, in part, an explanation for the regional variation in stroke mortality but fail to support the potential for a contribution of regional differences in diabetes management.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Diabetes and hypertension impart approximately the same increased relative risk for stroke, although hypertension has a larger population-attributable risk because of its higher population prevalence. With a growing epidemic of obesity and associated increasing prevalence of diabetes that disproportionately impacts the southeastern Stroke Belt states, any potential contribution of diabetes to the geographic disparity in stroke mortality will only increase. METHODS: Racial and geographic differences in diabetes prevalence and diabetes awareness, treatment, and control were assessed in the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study, a national population-based cohort of black and white participants older than 45 years of age. At the time of this report, 21 959 had been enrolled. RESULTS: The odds of diabetes were significantly increased in both white and black residents of the stroke buckle (OR, 1.26; [1.10, 1.44]; OR, 1.45 [1.26, 1.66], respectively) and Stroke Belt (OR, 1.22; [1.09, 1.36]; OR, 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]) compared to the rest of the United States. In the buckle, regional differences were not fully mediated and remained significant when controlling for socioeconomic status and risk factors. Addition of hypertension to the models did not reduce the magnitude of the associations. There were no significant differences by region with regard to awareness, treatment, or control for either race. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses support a possible role of regional variation in the prevalence of diabetes as, in part, an explanation for the regional variation in stroke mortality but fail to support the potential for a contribution of regional differences in diabetes management.
Authors: Linda S Geiss; Liping Pan; Betsy Cadwell; Edward W Gregg; Stephanie M Benjamin; Michael M Engelgau Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: George Howard; Ron Prineas; Claudia Moy; Mary Cushman; Martha Kellum; Ella Temple; Andra Graham; Virginia Howard Journal: Stroke Date: 2006-03-23 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Virginia J Howard; Mary Cushman; Leavonne Pulley; Camilo R Gomez; Rodney C Go; Ronald J Prineas; Andra Graham; Claudia S Moy; George Howard Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2005-06-29 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Liane J Tinsley; Nathan D Wong; Jane E B Reusch; Suzanne V Arnold; Mikhail N Kosiborod; Yuanyuan Tang; Lori M Laffel; Sanjeev N Mehta Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: Peter T Nelson; Charles D Smith; Erin A Abner; Frederick A Schmitt; Stephen W Scheff; Gregory J Davis; Jeffrey N Keller; Gregory A Jicha; Daron Davis; Wang Wang-Xia; Adria Hartman; Douglas G Katz; William R Markesbery Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2008-08-22
Authors: Mehul D Patel; Gilson Honvoh; Antonio R Fernandez; Rhonda Cadena; Emma R Kelly; Philip McDaniel; Jane H Brice Journal: South Med J Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 0.954
Authors: Neil A Zakai; Leslie A McClure; Suzanne E Judd; Monika M Safford; Aaron R Folsom; Pamela L Lutsey; Mary Cushman Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-02-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rikki M Tanner; Orlando M Gutiérrez; Suzanne Judd; William McClellan; C Barrett Bowling; Brian D Bradbury; Monika M Safford; Mary Cushman; David Warnock; Paul Muntner Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 8.860