A demonstration area for type 2 diabetes prevention in Barranquilla and Juan Mina (Colombia): Baseline characteristics of the study participants

Identifying diabetes risks among Indonesians: A cross-sectional study in a community setting

Background

There is an upward surge in diabetes patients worldwide, including in Indonesia, annually. Diabetes can lead to new diseases that burden patients' lives further. Nurses can reduce this problem by identifying people at risk of developing diabetes and educating them on how to prevent diabetes.

Objective

The study aimed to determine the risk of diabetes in the Indonesian population.

Methods

The descriptive research involved a sample of 1216 Indonesians living in North Sumatra Province. Participants were nondiabetic individuals selected using the convenience method from May to October 2020. This study utilized the Indonesian version of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) tool and employed various statistical analyses, including frequencies, percentages, chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test.

Results

Of the total samples, 372 were males (30.6%), and 844 were females (69.4%). The risk of developing diabetes was classified as low (57.1%), slightly elevated (36.4%), moderate (5.3%), high (1.0%), and very high (0.2%). Only one of the eight risk factors that differed significantly between men and women was a history of elevated blood glucose levels, with a p-value of 0.02.

Conclusion

The study identified a portrait of the number and percentage of diabetes risk factors in a community setting in Indonesia. Nurses must provide education on diabetes prevention to not only members of the local community at the research site but also the general public, nationally and globally.

Large scale application of the Finnish diabetes risk score in Latin American and Caribbean populations: a descriptive study

Background

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) continues to increase in the Americas. Identifying people at risk for T2D is critical to the prevention of T2D complications, especially cardiovascular disease. This study gauges the ability to implement large population-based organized screening campaigns in 19 Latin American and Caribbean countries to detect people at risk for T2D using the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC).

Methods

This cross-sectional descriptive analysis uses data collected in a sample of men and women 18 years of age or older who completed FINDRISC via eHealth during a Guinness World Record attempt campaign between October 25 and November 1, 2021. FINDRISC is a non-invasive screening tool based on age, body mass index, waist circumference, physical activity, daily intake of fruits and vegetables, history of hyperglycemia, history of antihypertensive drug treatment, and family history of T2D, assigning a score ranging from 0 to 26 points. A cut-off point of ≥ 12 points was considered as high risk for T2D.

Results

The final sample size consisted of 29,662 women (63%) and 17,605 men (27%). In total, 35% of subjects were at risk of T2D. The highest frequency rates (FINDRISC ≥ 12) were observed in Chile (39%), Central America (36.4%), and Peru (36.1%). Chile also had the highest proportion of people having a FINDRISC ≥15 points (25%), whereas the lowest was observed in Colombia (11.3%).

Conclusions

FINDRISC can be easily implemented via eHealth technology over social networks in Latin American and Caribbean populations to detect people with high risk for T2D. Primary healthcare strategies are needed to perform T2D organized screening to deliver early, accessible, culturally sensitive, and sustainable interventions to prevent sequelae of T2D, and reduce the clinical and economic burden of cardiometabolic-based chronic disease.

Riesgo cardiovascular en pacientes con FINDRISC-C mayor o igual a 12

Introducción: la herramienta FINDRISC permite calcular el riesgo de desarrollar diabetes con punto de corte para Colombia de 12.  Existe evidencia de que el riesgo cardiovascular se incrementa a medida que lo hace el puntaje, pero en Colombia no existe información cuando es ≥ 12. Objetivo: establecer el riesgo cardiovascular (RCV) en pacientes con FINDRISK-C ≥ 12 mediante score Framingham ajustado para Colombia.  Materiales y métodos: subanálisis transversal retrospectivo en 796 pacientes a quienes se les aplicó el cuestionario FINDRISC-C, de ellos 293 con puntaje ≥ 12 y 262 cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad. Antes se les calculó el RCV mediante análisis uni y multivariado, significancias estadísticas y análisis de correspondencias múltiple. Resultados: 262 pacientes, 63% mujeres, 87% tuvieron sobrepeso y obesidad, promedio de perímetro abdominal 97 cm, 10% eran fumadores y 48% tenían antecedente familiar de diabetes mellitus tipo 2. Se encontró una media de RCV de 8,10 (IC 7,29-8,91), al estratificar por FINDRISC-C la media para cada una de las categorías fue: FINDRISC-C moderado 7,83; FINDRISC-C alto 7,87, FINDRISC-C muy alto 12,61.  La prevalencia de dislipidemia fue de 46,2 % (IC 95%: 40-50) siendo mayor en hombres (53,6%). Conclusión: los pacientes con FINDRISC-C ≥ 12 tienen un RCV entre moderado y alto, existiendo tendencia al incremento del porcentaje de riesgo calculado según score Framingham ajustado para Colombia, a medida que aumenta el puntaje FINDRISC-C.  La prevalencia de dislipidemia en pacientes con FINDRISC-C ≥ 12 fue elevada.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) for use in Brazilian Portuguese: questionnaire validity study

BACKGROUND

The Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) is a questionnaire that was developed by Finnish researchers to track the risk of diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

To translate, cross-culturally adapt and validate the FINDRISC for use in Brazilian Portuguese.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Questionnaire validity study conducted at a private university.

METHODS

The Brazilian version of the FINDRISC was developed through the processes of translation, back-translation, committee review and pre-testing. Test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), kappa coefficient, standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimum detectable change (MDC). Internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's alpha. For construct validity, the total score of the FINDRISC was correlated with the Diabetes Knowledge Scale (DKN-A) and Diabetes Mellitus Risk Questionnaire (QRDM). Ceiling and floor effects were also evaluated in the present study.

RESULTS

For construct validity and floor and ceiling effect measurements, a total sample of 107 participants was used. For reliability, a subsample of 51 participants out of the total sample was used. We identified adequate values for reliability (kappa ≥ 0.79 and ICC = 0.98) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.84). Regarding the error inherent in the FINDRISC, we found SEM = 8.02% and MDC = 22.44%. There were significant correlations between the FINDRISC and the QRDM (r = 0.686) and DKN-A (r = -0.216). No ceiling or floor effects were found.

CONCLUSION

The Brazilian version of the FINDRISC has adequate psychometric properties that are in accordance with the best international recommendations.

Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder characterised by hyperglycaemia and associated with a heavy burden of microvascular and macrovascular complications, frequently remains undiagnosed. Screening of apparently healthy individuals may lead to early detection and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and may prevent or delay the development of related complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, LILACS, the WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception. The date of the last search was May 2019 for all databases. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials involving adults and children without known diabetes mellitus, conducted over at least three months, that assessed the effect of diabetes screening (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) compared to no diabetes screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for potential relevance and reviewed the full-texts of potentially relevant studies, extracted data, and carried out 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 4651 titles and abstracts identified by the search and assessed 92 full-texts/records for inclusion. We included one cluster-randomised trial, the ADDITION-Cambridge study, which involved 20,184 participants from 33 general practices in Eastern England and assessed the effects of inviting versus not inviting high-risk individuals to screening for diabetes. The diabetes risk score was used to identify high-risk individuals; it comprised variables relating to age, sex, body mass index, and the use of prescribed steroid and anti-hypertensive medication. Twenty-seven practices were randomised to the screening group (11,737 participants actually attending screening) and 5 practices to the no-screening group (4137 participants). In both groups, 36% of participants were women; the average age of participants was 58.2 years in the screening group and 57.9 years in the no-screening group. Almost half of participants in both groups were on antihypertensive medication. The findings from the first phase of this study indicate that screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes did not show a clear difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.25, low-certainty evidence). Screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus showed an HR of 1.26, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.12 (low-certainty evidence) for diabetes-related mortality (based on whether diabetes was reported as a cause of death on the death certificate). Diabetes-related morbidity and health-related quality of life were only reported in a subsample and did not show a substantial difference between the screening intervention and control. The included study did not report on adverse events, incidence of type 2 diabetes, glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and socioeconomic effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain about the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes on all-cause mortality and diabetes-related mortality. Evidence was available from one study only. We are therefore unable to draw any firm conclusions relating to the health outcomes of early type 2 diabetes mellitus screening. Furthermore, the included study did not assess all of the outcomes prespecified in the review (diabetes-related morbidity, incidence of type 2 diabetes, health-related quality of life, adverse events, socioeconomic effects).

Early Lifestyle Interventions in People with Impaired Glucose Tolerance in Northern Colombia: The DEMOJUAN Project

BACKGROUND

The objective of the demonstration project for type 2 diabetes prevention in the Barranquilla and Juan Mina (DEMOJUAN) study was to investigate the extent to which it is possible to reach normal glucose metabolism with early lifestyle interventions in people at high risk of type 2 diabetes (prediabetes), compared with those who receive standard usual care.

METHODS

DEMOJUAN was a randomized controlled trial conducted in Juan Mina and Barranquilla, Northern Colombia. Eligible participants were randomized into one of three groups (control group, initial nutritional intervention, and initial physical activity intervention). The duration of the intervention was 24 months. The main study outcome in the present analysis was reversion to normoglycemia. Relative risks and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated for reversal to normoglycemia and T2D incidence.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant association between the intervention groups and reversion to normoglycemia. The relative risk of reversion to normoglycemia was 0.88 (95% CI 0.70-1.12) for the initial nutritional intervention group participants and 0.95 (95% CI 0.75-1.20) for the initial physical activity intervention group participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study did not find any statistically significant differences in reversion to normoglycemia or the development of type 2 diabetes between the intervention groups and the control group in this population.