CONTEXT: National databases can be used to investigate diabetes prevalence and health care use. Guideline-based care can reduce diabetes complications and morbidity. Yet little is known about the prevalence of diabetes and compliance with diabetes care guidelines among rural residents and whether different national databases provide similar results. PURPOSE: To examine rural-urban differences in the prevalence of diabetes and compliance with guidelines, and to compare the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS). METHODS: Data for 2001-2002 were analyzed and compared by rural-urban status. Prevalence was calculated as simple unadjusted, weighted unadjusted, and weighted adjusted using a multivariate approach. Results from the 2 databases were compared. FINDINGS: A slightly higher prevalence of diabetes among rural residents, 7.9% versus 6.0% in MEPS and 7.6% versus 6.6% in BRFSS, was found and persisted after adjustment for age, BMI, insurance coverage, and other demographic characteristics (adjusted OR 1.16 [1.02-1.31] in MEPS; 1.19 [1.01-1.20] in BRFSS). Rural persons in MEPS were less likely to receive an annual eye examination (aOR = 0.85) and a feet check (aOR = 0.89). A significantly (P < .05) smaller proportion of rural residents in BRFSS received an annual eye examination (aOR = 0.88), feet check (aOR = 0.85), or diabetes education (aOR = 0.83). Rural residents in both datasets were more likely to get a quarterly HbA1c test done. CONCLUSION: Rural residents in both datasets had higher prevalence of diabetes. Though not always statistically significant, the trend was to less guideline compliance in rural areas.
CONTEXT: National databases can be used to investigate diabetes prevalence and health care use. Guideline-based care can reduce diabetes complications and morbidity. Yet little is known about the prevalence of diabetes and compliance with diabetes care guidelines among rural residents and whether different national databases provide similar results. PURPOSE: To examine rural-urban differences in the prevalence of diabetes and compliance with guidelines, and to compare the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS). METHODS: Data for 2001-2002 were analyzed and compared by rural-urban status. Prevalence was calculated as simple unadjusted, weighted unadjusted, and weighted adjusted using a multivariate approach. Results from the 2 databases were compared. FINDINGS: A slightly higher prevalence of diabetes among rural residents, 7.9% versus 6.0% in MEPS and 7.6% versus 6.6% in BRFSS, was found and persisted after adjustment for age, BMI, insurance coverage, and other demographic characteristics (adjusted OR 1.16 [1.02-1.31] in MEPS; 1.19 [1.01-1.20] in BRFSS). Rural persons in MEPS were less likely to receive an annual eye examination (aOR = 0.85) and a feet check (aOR = 0.89). A significantly (P < .05) smaller proportion of rural residents in BRFSS received an annual eye examination (aOR = 0.88), feet check (aOR = 0.85), or diabetes education (aOR = 0.83). Rural residents in both datasets were more likely to get a quarterly HbA1c test done. CONCLUSION: Rural residents in both datasets had higher prevalence of diabetes. Though not always statistically significant, the trend was to less guideline compliance in rural areas.
Authors: Carlos A Estrada; Monika M Safford; Amanda H Salanitro; Thomas K Houston; William Curry; Jessica H Williams; Fernando Ovalle; Yongin Kim; Pamela Foster; Jeroan J Allison Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2011-08-10 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Melinda M Davis; Margaret Spurlock; Kristen Dulacki; Thomas Meath; Hsin-Fang Grace Li; Dennis McCarty; Donald Warne; Bill Wright; K John McConnell Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Elaine C Khoong; Wesley S Gibbert; Jane M Garbutt; Walton Sumner; Ross C Brownson Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Sarka Lisonkova; Matthew D Haslam; Leanne Dahlgren; Innie Chen; Anne R Synnes; Kenneth I Lim Journal: CMAJ Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Anna M Gorczyca; Richard A Washburn; Lauren Ptomey; Matthew S Mayo; Debra K Sullivan; Cheryl A Gibson; Robert Lee; Sarah Stolte; Joseph E Donnelly Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Stephen A Tonks; Sohil Makwana; Amanda H Salanitro; Monika M Safford; Thomas K Houston; Jeroan J Allison; William Curry; Carlos A Estrada Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 4.333