Comparison of diagnostic screening methods for diabetes in patients with heart failure

IF 1 Q4 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetes epidemiology and management Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.deman.2022.100109
Yuta Ishikawa , Emma M. Laing , Alex K. Anderson , Donglan Zhang , Joseph M. Kindler , Rupal Trivedi-Kapoor , Elisabeth L. P. Sattler
{"title":"Comparison of diagnostic screening methods for diabetes in patients with heart failure","authors":"Yuta Ishikawa ,&nbsp;Emma M. Laing ,&nbsp;Alex K. Anderson ,&nbsp;Donglan Zhang ,&nbsp;Joseph M. Kindler ,&nbsp;Rupal Trivedi-Kapoor ,&nbsp;Elisabeth L. P. Sattler","doi":"10.1016/j.deman.2022.100109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aims</h3><p>The objective of the study was to compare screening performances of HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and two-hour plasma glucose (2hPG) in heart failure (HF) patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We included 237 HF patients aged &gt;20 years without history of diabetes, using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2005–2016). American Diabetes Association diabetes screening criteria were used: (1) HbA1c ≥6.5%, (2) FPG ≥126 mg/dL, and (3) 2hPG ≥200 mg/dL. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for HbA1c and FPG were examined against reference methods.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><em>N</em> = 50 patients (20.5%) met at least 1 of 3 clinical criteria for diabetes. 2hPG alone identified 70.5% of patients, whereas HbA1c alone identified only 27.0% of patients. Sensitivity and specificity using a HbA1c cutoff at ≥6.5% were 24.4% and 97.6%, respectively. The Youden's J statistic for HbA1c was maximized at 6.1%. The area under the ROC curve of HbA1c against 2hPG was significantly lower compared to FPG (0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.88; 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.94, respectively; <em>p</em> = 0.04).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Blood glucose criteria are more sensitive than HbA1c when screening HF patients for diabetes. Future studies should test performance of a HbA1c cutoff at 6.1% when FPG or 2hPG cannot be completed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72796,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes epidemiology and management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes epidemiology and management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666970622000592","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims

The objective of the study was to compare screening performances of HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and two-hour plasma glucose (2hPG) in heart failure (HF) patients.

Methods

We included 237 HF patients aged >20 years without history of diabetes, using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2005–2016). American Diabetes Association diabetes screening criteria were used: (1) HbA1c ≥6.5%, (2) FPG ≥126 mg/dL, and (3) 2hPG ≥200 mg/dL. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for HbA1c and FPG were examined against reference methods.

Results

N = 50 patients (20.5%) met at least 1 of 3 clinical criteria for diabetes. 2hPG alone identified 70.5% of patients, whereas HbA1c alone identified only 27.0% of patients. Sensitivity and specificity using a HbA1c cutoff at ≥6.5% were 24.4% and 97.6%, respectively. The Youden's J statistic for HbA1c was maximized at 6.1%. The area under the ROC curve of HbA1c against 2hPG was significantly lower compared to FPG (0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.88; 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.94, respectively; p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Blood glucose criteria are more sensitive than HbA1c when screening HF patients for diabetes. Future studies should test performance of a HbA1c cutoff at 6.1% when FPG or 2hPG cannot be completed.

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
心衰患者糖尿病诊断筛查方法的比较
目的:本研究的目的是比较心力衰竭(HF)患者HbA1c、空腹血糖(FPG)和两小时血糖(2hPG)的筛查性能。方法采用2005-2016年全国健康与营养调查(National Health and Nutrition Survey)资料,选取年龄20岁、无糖尿病史的HF患者237例。采用美国糖尿病协会糖尿病筛查标准:(1)HbA1c≥6.5%,(2)FPG≥126 mg/dL, (3) 2hPG≥200 mg/dL。对照参考方法检验HbA1c和FPG的敏感性、特异性、预测值和受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。结果50例(20.5%)患者符合糖尿病3项临床标准中的至少1项。单独使用2hPG识别70.5%的患者,而单独使用HbA1c仅识别27.0%的患者。HbA1c临界值≥6.5%的敏感性和特异性分别为24.4%和97.6%。HbA1c的Youden's J统计值达到6.1%。与FPG相比,HbA1c与2hPG的ROC曲线下面积显著降低(0.79,95% CI 0.70-0.88;0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.94;p = 0.04)。结论在筛选心衰患者糖尿病时,血糖指标比HbA1c指标更敏感。未来的研究应该测试当FPG或2hPG不能完成时HbA1c截止值为6.1%的性能。
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
Diabetes epidemiology and management
Diabetes epidemiology and management Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Public Health and Health Policy
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 days
期刊最新文献
Assessment of vitamin D status in obese and non-obese patients: A case-control study The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes-related mortality Diabetes in pregnancy: Anxious minds precarious times Primary care monitoring of HbA1c tests in type 2 diabetic patients in Northern France and impact of the successive COVID-19 pandemic containments Evaluation of a Support Tool for Diabetes Control in primary care – A Qualitative study with primary care staff
×
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