C C Cowie1, M I Harris. 1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-6600, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether medical care for diabetes is different among non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans, and Mexican-Americans with NIDDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to a representative U.S. sample of 2,170 noninstitutionalized adults with NIDDM. Information was obtained on physician visits, hyperglycemic therapy, monitoring of glycemic control, screening for and monitoring of complications, and diabetes education. RESULTS: About 90% of subjects had a regular diabetes physician, and the physician visit rate was similar by race (median of four visits per year). African-Americans were more likely to be treated with insulin (51.9%) than non-Hispanic whites (35.9%, P < 0.0001) and Mexican-Americans (46.2%). Among insulin-treated subjects, African-Americans were less likely to use multiple daily insulin injections (35.1 vs. 53.8% of non-Hispanic whites [P < 0.0001] and 50.5% of Mexican-Americans [P = 0.027]) and were less likely to self-monitor their blood glucose at least once per day (14.0 vs. 29.8% of non-Hispanic whites [P < 0.0001] and 29.0% of Mexican-Americans). The rates of visits to specialists for diabetes complications, physician testing of blood glucose, and screening for hypertension, retinopathy, and foot problems were not substantially different among the three race/ethnic groups. A higher proportion of African-Americans (43.3%) than non-Hispanic whites (31.5%, P < 0.0001) and Mexican-Americans (25.6%, P = 0.001) had received patient education; however, the median number of hours of instruction was lower for African-Americans. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of diabetes care is similar among non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans, and Mexican-Americans. The major differences relate to methods of glycemic control and patient education.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether medical care for diabetes is different among non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans, and Mexican-Americans with NIDDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to a representative U.S. sample of 2,170 noninstitutionalized adults with NIDDM. Information was obtained on physician visits, hyperglycemic therapy, monitoring of glycemic control, screening for and monitoring of complications, and diabetes education. RESULTS: About 90% of subjects had a regular diabetes physician, and the physician visit rate was similar by race (median of four visits per year). African-Americans were more likely to be treated with insulin (51.9%) than non-Hispanic whites (35.9%, P < 0.0001) and Mexican-Americans (46.2%). Among insulin-treated subjects, African-Americans were less likely to use multiple daily insulin injections (35.1 vs. 53.8% of non-Hispanic whites [P < 0.0001] and 50.5% of Mexican-Americans [P = 0.027]) and were less likely to self-monitor their blood glucose at least once per day (14.0 vs. 29.8% of non-Hispanic whites [P < 0.0001] and 29.0% of Mexican-Americans). The rates of visits to specialists for diabetes complications, physician testing of blood glucose, and screening for hypertension, retinopathy, and foot problems were not substantially different among the three race/ethnic groups. A higher proportion of African-Americans (43.3%) than non-Hispanic whites (31.5%, P < 0.0001) and Mexican-Americans (25.6%, P = 0.001) had received patient education; however, the median number of hours of instruction was lower for African-Americans. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of diabetes care is similar among non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans, and Mexican-Americans. The major differences relate to methods of glycemic control and patient education.
Authors: Ronny A Bell; Sara A Quandt; Thomas A Arcury; Beverly M Snively; Jeanette M Stafford; Shannon L Smith; Anne H Skelly Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2005 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Connie Mah Trinacty; Alyce S Adams; Stephen B Soumerai; Fang Zhang; James B Meigs; John D Piette; Dennis Ross-Degnan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-09-01 Impact factor: 5.128