Sepideh Babaniamansour 1 , Ehsan Aliniagerdroudbari 2 , Mahtab Niroomand 3 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
PURPOSE: Detection and modification of various factors such as life style, smoking and so on can significantly improve the glycemic control status. This study aimed to investigate glycemic control status and its relevant factors among patients with Type 2 DM. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the glycemic control status of patients with type 2 DM was investigated. In addition, relevant risk factors including demographic, clinical characteristics, self-care management behavior, medication adherence and laboratory data and their relationship with glycemic control status were assessed. Glycemic control status was defined as very good (HbA1c < 7%), good (HbA1c = 7-7.9%), poor (HbA1c = 8-9.9%) or extremely bad (HbA1c ≥ 10%). RESULTS: The present study included 562 patients (64.4% female). Most of the patients (37%) had poor glycemic control status. Microvascular complications especially diabetic neuropathy were the most common complications in our study. Glycemic control had significant relationship with level of education (p < .01) and occupation (p = .04). Among laboratory parameters, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and total cholesterol levels were significantly lower in patients with desirable glycemic control (p < .05). The linear regression test showed that HbA1c had significant relationship with FPG (p < .01) and increasing one standard deviation in FPG can increase the level of HbA1c 0.014. CONCLUSION: Glycemic control status in our study was very low and FPG was the strongest predictor of glycemic control status. Some other factors were also associated such as education level, occupation, type of treatment, diastolic blood pressure, the lipid profile and aspartate transaminase. © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.
PURPOSE: Detection and modification of various factors such as life style, smoking and so on can significantly improve the glycemic control status. This study aimed to investigate glycemic control status and its relevant factors among patients with Type 2 DM. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the glycemic control status of patients with type 2 DM was investigated. In addition, relevant risk factors including demographic, clinical characteristics, self-care management behavior, medication adherence and laboratory data and their relationship with glycemic control status were assessed. Glycemic control status was defined as very good (HbA1c < 7%), good (HbA1c = 7-7.9%), poor (HbA1c = 8-9.9%) or extremely bad (HbA1c ≥ 10%). RESULTS: The present study included 562 patients (64.4% female). Most of the patients (37%) had poor glycemic control status. Microvascular complications especially diabetic neuropathy were the most common complications in our study. Glycemic control had significant relationship with level of education (p < .01) and occupation (p = .04). Among laboratory parameters, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and total cholesterol levels were significantly lower in patients with desirable glycemic control (p < .05). The linear regression test showed that HbA1c had significant relationship with FPG (p < .01) and increasing one standard deviation in FPG can increase the level of HbA1c 0.014. CONCLUSION: Glycemic control status in our study was very low and FPG was the strongest predictor of glycemic control status. Some other factors were also associated such as education level, occupation, type of treatment, diastolic blood pressure, the lipid profile and aspartate transaminase. © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.
Entities: Chemical
Keywords:
Blood glucose; Diabetes mellitus; Glycated hemoglobin; Risk factor; Self-monitoring
Year: 2020
PMID： 33520813 PMCID： PMC7843766 DOI： 10.1007/s40200-020-00583-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Metab Disord ISSN： 2251-6581