Search

Diabet. Med. 28, 1416-1424 (2011) Abstract Aims To describe and compare attendance rates and the proportions of people identified with Type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with previously unknown diabetes who participated in screening programmes undertaken in general practice in the UK, Denmark and the Netherlands as part of the ADDITION-Europe study. Methods In Cambridge, routine computer data searches were conducted to identify individuals aged 40-69 years at high risk of Type 2 diabetes using the Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score. In Denmark, the Danish Diabetes Risk Score was mailed to individuals aged 40-69 years, or completed by patients visiting their general practitice. In the Netherlands, the Hoorn Symptom Risk Questionnaire was mailed to individuals aged 50-69 years. In these three centres, high-risk individuals were invited to attend subsequent steps in the screening programme, including random blood glucose, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose and/or oral glucose tolerance test. In Leicester, eligible people aged 40-69 years were invited directly for an oral glucose tolerance test. In all centres, Type 2 diabetes was defined according to World Health Organization 1999 diagnostic criteria. Results Attendance rates ranged from 20.2% (oral glucose tolerance test in Leicester without pre-stratification) to 95.1% (random blood glucose in opportunistic screening in Denmark in high-risk people). The percentage of people with newly detected Type 2 diabetes from the target population ranged from 0.33% (Leicester) to 1.09% (the Netherlands). Conclusions Screening for Type 2 diabetes was acceptable and feasible, but relatively few participants were diagnosed in all participating centres. Different strategies may be required to increase initial attendance and ensure completion of screening programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intensive treatment of multiple cardiovascular risk factors can halve mortality among people with established type 2 diabetes. We investigated the effect of early multifactorial treatment after diagnosis by screening., Methods: In a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, parallel-group trial done in Denmark, the Netherlands, and the UK, 343 general practices were randomly assigned screening of registered patients aged 40-69 years without known diabetes followed by routine care of diabetes or screening followed by intensive treatment of multiple risk factors. The primary endpoint was first cardiovascular event, including cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, revascularisation, and non-traumatic amputation within 5 years. Patients and staff assessing outcomes were unaware of the practice's study group assignment. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00237549., Findings: Primary endpoint data were available for 3055 (99·9%) of 3057 screen-detected patients. The mean age was 60·3 (SD 6·9) years and the mean duration of follow-up was 5·3 (SD 1·6) years. Improvements in cardiovascular risk factors (HbA(1c) and cholesterol concentrations and blood pressure) were slightly but significantly better in the intensive treatment group. The incidence of first cardiovascular event was 7·2% (13·5 per 1000 person-years) in the intensive treatment group and 8·5% (15·9 per 1000 person-years) in the routine care group (hazard ratio 0·83, 95% CI 0·65-1·05), and of all-cause mortality 6·2% (11·6 per 1000 person-years) and 6·7% (12·5 per 1000 person-years; 0·91, 0·69-1·21), respectively., Interpretation: An intervention to promote early intensive management of patients with type 2 diabetes was associated with a small, non-significant reduction in the incidence of cardiovascular events and death., Funding: National Health Service Denmark, Danish Council for Strategic Research, Danish Research Foundation for General Practice, Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment, Danish National Board of Health, Danish Medical Research Council, Aarhus University Research Foundation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme, UK National Health Service R&D, UK National Institute for Health Research, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, Utrecht, Novo Nordisk, Astra, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Servier, HemoCue, Merck., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

OBJECTIVE To compare screen-detected diabetes prevalence and the degree of diagnostic agreement by ethnicity with the current oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)-based and newly proposed A1C-based diagnostic criteria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Six studies (1999-2009) from Denmark, the U.K., Australia, Greenland, Kenya, and India were tested for the probability of an A1C > or =6.5% among diabetic case subjects based on an OGTT. The difference in probability between centers was analyzed by logistic regression adjusting for relevant confounders. RESULTS Diabetes prevalence was lower with the A1C-based diagnostic criteria in four of six studies. The probability of an A1C > or =6.5% among OGTT-diagnosed case subjects ranged widely (17.0-78.0%) by study center. Differences in diagnostic agreement between ethnic subgroups in the U.K. study were of the same magnitude as between-country comparisons. CONCLUSIONS A shift to an A1C-based diagnosis for diabetes will have substantially different consequences for diabetes prevalence across ethnic groups and populations.