INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ADA PREDIABETES RISK TEST IN IDENTIFYING PREDIABETIC TURKISH PATIENTS AND DETERMINATION OF THE FREQUENCY OF RETINOPATHY IN PREDIABETIC PATIENTS

Ahmet Veli Sanibas, F. Çakmak, I. Baydar, D. Binici
{"title":"INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ADA PREDIABETES RISK TEST IN IDENTIFYING PREDIABETIC TURKISH PATIENTS AND DETERMINATION OF THE FREQUENCY OF RETINOPATHY IN PREDIABETIC PATIENTS","authors":"Ahmet Veli Sanibas, F. Çakmak, I. Baydar, D. Binici","doi":"10.56766/ntms.1161735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: In this study, the Turkish version of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) prediabetes risk test and the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were administered to patients to determine the rate of prediabetic patients in our geographical region and investigate its consistency with the ADA risk test. In addition, the presence of retinopathy in prediabetic patients was examined. \nMaterial and Method: \nThe study included a total of 342 patients with a fasting plasma glucose value of 100-125 mg/dl. The 75-g OGTT test was performed on the patients. The ADA prediabetes risk test was also administered, and the scores were noted. The OGTT and risk test results were compared. According to the ADA prediabetes risk test, the patients were classified into those at risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and those diagnosed with prediabetes. In the evaluation of retinopathy, visual acuity, intraocular pressure measurement, and anterior segment and fundus examinations were performed in each patient. The data of the patients were compared with statistical analysis methods. \nResults: When the OGTT results of the patients with negative ADA prediabetes risk test scores were compared, the sensitivity was determined as 54% and the specificity as 63% (p0.05). There was no retinopathy finding in the eye examination of 262 of the 342 patients included in the study (p>0.05). \nConclusion: In this study, we found that a positive ADA prediabetes risk score was effective in predicting prediabetes, but it was not sufficient. However, prediabetes diagnosed according to OGTT was found to be higher in the patients with negative test scores. Therefore, the prediabetes risk test was not effective in predicting prediabetes among the patients with negative scores.","PeriodicalId":371755,"journal":{"name":"New Trends in Medicine Sciences","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Trends in Medicine Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56766/ntms.1161735","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: In this study, the Turkish version of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) prediabetes risk test and the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were administered to patients to determine the rate of prediabetic patients in our geographical region and investigate its consistency with the ADA risk test. In addition, the presence of retinopathy in prediabetic patients was examined. Material and Method: The study included a total of 342 patients with a fasting plasma glucose value of 100-125 mg/dl. The 75-g OGTT test was performed on the patients. The ADA prediabetes risk test was also administered, and the scores were noted. The OGTT and risk test results were compared. According to the ADA prediabetes risk test, the patients were classified into those at risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and those diagnosed with prediabetes. In the evaluation of retinopathy, visual acuity, intraocular pressure measurement, and anterior segment and fundus examinations were performed in each patient. The data of the patients were compared with statistical analysis methods. Results: When the OGTT results of the patients with negative ADA prediabetes risk test scores were compared, the sensitivity was determined as 54% and the specificity as 63% (p0.05). There was no retinopathy finding in the eye examination of 262 of the 342 patients included in the study (p>0.05). Conclusion: In this study, we found that a positive ADA prediabetes risk score was effective in predicting prediabetes, but it was not sufficient. However, prediabetes diagnosed according to OGTT was found to be higher in the patients with negative test scores. Therefore, the prediabetes risk test was not effective in predicting prediabetes among the patients with negative scores.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ada糖尿病前期风险试验在识别土耳其糖尿病前期患者和确定糖尿病前期患者视网膜病变频率方面的有效性研究
目的:本研究采用土耳其版美国糖尿病协会(ADA)前驱糖尿病危险试验和75 g口服葡萄糖耐量试验(OGTT)对患者进行检测,以确定我国地理区域内糖尿病前驱患者的发生率,并探讨其与ADA危险试验的一致性。此外,还检查了糖尿病前期患者是否存在视网膜病变。材料与方法:本研究共纳入342例空腹血糖值为100-125 mg/dl的患者。对患者进行75 g OGTT试验。同时进行ADA前驱糖尿病风险测试,并记录得分。比较OGTT和风险测试结果。根据ADA前驱糖尿病危险试验,将患者分为2型糖尿病(DM)危险组和诊断为前驱糖尿病的患者。在评估视网膜病变时,对每位患者进行了视力、眼压测量、前段和眼底检查。采用统计学分析方法对患者资料进行比较。结果:比较ADA前驱糖尿病危险测试评分阴性患者OGTT结果,确定敏感性为54%,特异性为63% (p0.05)。342例患者中有262例眼科检查未发现视网膜病变(p>0.05)。结论:在本研究中,我们发现ADA前驱糖尿病风险评分阳性对预测前驱糖尿病是有效的,但并不充分。然而,根据OGTT诊断的前驱糖尿病在测试分数为阴性的患者中被发现更高。因此,前驱糖尿病风险测试在得分为负的患者中不能有效预测前驱糖尿病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Increased Atherogenic Indices and Basal Cell Carcinoma Investigation of the Protective Effects of Capparis Spinosa Extract in Indomethacin Induced Ulcer Model in Rats A Newly Defined Electromagnetic Dural Armor Functioned as a Brain Protecting Cerebrosphere: A Preliminary Theoretical Analysis Postnatal Hospitalization Rates and Short-Term Follow-up Results of Late Preterm, Early Term, and Term Newborns Hippophae Rhamnoides L. Botanical, Medicinal, Traditional, and Current Use of Plant and Fruits: A Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1