Search

Context: Given the dramatic rise in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in recent decades, identifying individuals at increased risk of T2DM and validating methods to reduce their risk of disease progression is important. With more than one-third of US adults having prediabetes, a more precise stratification of absolute risk of T2DM incidence would help in prioritizing prevention efforts. Objective: To develop a simple and clinically useful schema to stratify short-term (2-year) absolute risk of T2DM. Design: Observational study of more than 77,000 adult members (age 18-75 years) from 3 Regions of the Kaiser Foundation Health Plan with prediabetes (hemoglobin A1C [HbA1C] = 5.7%-6.4%). Main Outcome Measures: The 2-year probability for development of diabetes as a function of baseline HbA1C and body mass index (BMI). Results: The 2-year risk of diabetes diagnosis varied widely by HbA1C and BMI. A small subset (5.2%) had a very high risk of T2DM developing within 2 years. Another 13.3% had a moderate 2-year risk of T2DM, whereas most (81.5%) of the population was at much lower risk. Thus, most Kaiser Foundation Health Plan members with prediabetes have only modest risk of progression to T2DM within 2 years. Conclusion: Using HbA1C and BMI, we created a simple stratification scheme to more precisely estimate risk of T2DM incidence. This will enable more efficient assignment of prevention interventions and clinical and laboratory follow-up to the small subset at highest risk, while minimizing the potentially negative effects of overdiagnosis among the majority with prediabetes who are not at high short-term risk of T2DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Asthma Impact Survey (AIS-6) is a new six question asthma outcome tool for which information on validity has not been published.Objective: To provide validation for the AIS-6 as a brief asthma-specific quality of life tool.Methods: Surveys were sent to a random sample of members of a large managed care organization who were at least 35 years of age and in the two-year period preceding the survey had either (1) at least one documented asthma-related medical encounter, or (2) at least a 6 months supply of asthma medication dispensed. In addition to the AIS-6, the survey included a validated quality of life tool [the mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ)]; a validated asthma control questionnaire [the Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire (ATAQ)]; a validated symptom severity scale (AOMS); and information regarding demographics, co-morbidities, asthma severity, and asthma management. The results of the AIS-6 were compared to the results of the other tools by means of correlation and factor analysis. Independent predictors of AIS-6 and AQLQ scores were determined by multiple stepwise linear regression analyses.Results: AIS-6 scores were significantly related to female sex, educational level, income, smoking, body mass index (BMI), COPD, steroid use, and hospitalization history in bivariate analyses. The AIS-6 score significantly correlated (r = - 0.84, p < 0.0001) with the AQLQ total score and loaded on the three factors (activity, symptoms, and concern/bother) reflected by the survey information and on which the AQLQ also loaded. Significant but somewhat smaller correlations were found between the AIS-6 and the ATAQ (r = 0.70, p < 0.0001) and the AOMS (r = 0.55, p < 0.0001). Independent predictors were the same for the AIS-6 and AQLQ and included oral steroid use, COPD history, BMI, female sex, educational level, and hospitalization in the past year.Conclusion: These data support the validity of the short six-question AIS-6 as an asthma-specific quality of life tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: “Asthma-related quality of life” (QOL) refers to the perceived impact that asthma has on the patient’s QOL. Objective: National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to recommend standardized measures of the impact of asthma on QOL for use in future asthma clinical research. Methods: We reviewed published documentation regarding the development and psychometric evaluation; clinical research use since 2000; and extent to which the content of each existing QOL instrument provides a unique, reliable, and valid assessment of the intended construct. We classified instruments as core (required in future studies), supplemental (used according to the study’s aims and standardized), or emerging (requiring validation and standardization). This work was discussed at an National Institutes of Health-organized workshop convened in March 2010 and finalized in September 2011. Results: Eleven instruments for adults and 6 for children were identified for review. None qualified as core instruments because they predominantly measured indicators of asthma control (symptoms and/or functional status); failed to provide a distinct, reliable score measuring all key dimensions of the intended construct; and/or lacked adequate psychometric data. Conclusions: In the absence of existing instruments that meet the stated criteria, currently available instruments are classified as either supplemental or emerging. Research is strongly recommended to develop and evaluate instruments that provide a distinct, reliable measure of the patient’s perception of the impact of asthma on all of the key dimensions of QOL, an important outcome that is not captured in other outcome measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]