6 research outputs found

    Correlates of Treatment Patterns Among Youth With Type 2 Diabetes

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVETo describe treatment regimens in youth with type 2 diabetes and examine associations between regimens, demographic and clinical characteristics, and glycemic control.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThis report includes 474 youth with a clinical diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who completed a SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study visit. Diabetes treatment regimen was categorized as lifestyle alone, metformin monotherapy, any oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA) other than metformin or two or more OHAs, insulin monotherapy, and insulin plus any OHA(s). Association of treatment with demographic and clinical characteristics (fasting C-peptide [FCP], diabetes duration, and self-monitoring of blood glucose [SMBG]), and A1C was assessed by χ2 and ANOVA. Multiple linear regression models were used to evaluate independent associations of treatment regimens and A1C, adjusting for demographics, diabetes duration, FCP, and SMBG.RESULTSOver 50% of participants reported treatment with metformin alone or lifestyle. Of the autoantibody-negative youth, 40% were on metformin alone, while 33% were on insulin-containing regimens. Participants on metformin alone had a lower A1C (7.0 ± 2.0%, 53 ± 22 mmol/mol) than those on insulin alone (9.2 ± 2.7%, 77 ± 30 mmol/mol) or insulin plus OHA (8.6 ± 2.6%, 70 ± 28 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001). These differences remained significant after adjustment (7.5 ± 0.3%, 58 ± 3 mmol/mol; 9.1 ± 0.4%, 76 ± 4 mmol/mol; and 8.6 ± 0.4%, 70 ± 4 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001) and were more striking in those with diabetes for ≥2 years (7.9 ± 2.8, 9.9 ± 2.8, and 9.8 ± 2.6%). Over one-half of those on insulin-containing therapies still experience treatment failure (A1C ≥8%, 64 mmol/mol).CONCLUSIONSApproximately half of youth with type 2 diabetes were managed with lifestyle or metformin alone and had better glycemic control than individuals using other therapies. Those with longer diabetes duration in particular commonly experienced treatment failures, and more effective management strategies are needed

    Association of parental history of diabetes with cardiovascular disease risk factors in children with type 2 diabetes

    Get PDF
    Determine if parental diabetes(DM) is associated with unhealthier cardiovascular disease(CVD) risk profiles in youth with type 2 diabetes(T2D), and whether associations differed by race/ethnicity

    Correlates of Treatment Patterns Among Youth With Type 2 Diabetes

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment regimens in youth with type 2 diabetes and examine associations between regimens, demographic and clinical characteristics, and glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This report includes 474 youth with a clinical diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who completed a SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study visit. Diabetes treatment regimen was categorized as lifestyle alone, metformin monotherapy, any oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA) other than metformin or two or more OHAs, insulin monotherapy, and insulin plus any OHA(s). Association of treatment with demographic and clinical characteristics (fasting C-peptide [FCP], diabetes duration, and self-monitoring of blood glucose [SMBG]), and A1C was assessed by χ(2) and ANOVA. Multiple linear regression models were used to evaluate independent associations of treatment regimens and A1C, adjusting for demographics, diabetes duration, FCP, and SMBG. RESULTS: Over 50% of participants reported treatment with metformin alone or lifestyle. Of the autoantibody-negative youth, 40% were on metformin alone, while 33% were on insulin-containing regimens. Participants on metformin alone had a lower A1C (7.0 ± 2.0%, 53 ± 22 mmol/mol) than those on insulin alone (9.2 ± 2.7%, 77 ± 30 mmol/mol) or insulin plus OHA (8.6 ± 2.6%, 70 ± 28 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001). These differences remained significant after adjustment (7.5 ± 0.3%, 58 ± 3 mmol/mol; 9.1 ± 0.4%, 76 ± 4 mmol/mol; and 8.6 ± 0.4%, 70 ± 4 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001) and were more striking in those with diabetes for ≥2 years (7.9 ± 2.8, 9.9 ± 2.8, and 9.8 ± 2.6%). Over one-half of those on insulin-containing therapies still experience treatment failure (A1C ≥8%, 64 mmol/mol). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of youth with type 2 diabetes were managed with lifestyle or metformin alone and had better glycemic control than individuals using other therapies. Those with longer diabetes duration in particular commonly experienced treatment failures, and more effective management strategies are needed

    Prevalence of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Among Children and Adolescents From 2001 to 2009

    No full text
    IMPORTANCE: Despite concern about an “epidemic,” there are limited data on trends in prevalence of either type 1 or type 2 diabetes across US race and ethnic groups. OBJECTIVE: To estimate changes in the prevalence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in US youth, by sex, age, and race/ethnicity between 2001 and 2009. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Case patients were ascertained in 4 geographic areas and 1 managed health care plan. The study population was determined by the 2001 and 2009 bridged-race intercensal population estimates for geographic sites and membership counts for the health plan. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Prevalence (per 1000) of physician-diagnosed type 1 diabetes in youth aged 0 through 19 years and type 2 diabetes in youth aged 10 through 19 years. RESULTS: In 2001, 4958 of 3.3 million youth were diagnosed with type 1 diabetes for a prevalence of 1.48 per 1000 (95% CI, 1.44–1.52). In 2009, 6666 of 3.4 million youth were diagnosed with type 1 diabetes for a prevalence of 1.93 per 1000 (95% CI, 1.88–1.97). In 2009, the highest prevalence of type 1 diabetes was 2.55 per 1000 among white youth (95% CI, 2.48–2.62) and the lowest was 0.35 per 1000 in American Indian youth (95% CI, 0.26–0.47) and type 1 diabetes increased between 2001 and 2009 in all sex, age, and race/ethnic subgroups except for those with the lowest prevalence (age 0–4 years and American Indians). Adjusted for completeness of ascertainment, there was a 21.1% (95% CI, 15.6%–27.0%) increase in type 1 diabetes over 8 years. In 2001, 588 of 1.7 million youth were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes for a prevalence of 0.34 per 1000 (95% CI, 0.31–0.37). In 2009, 819 of 1.8 million were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes for a prevalence of 0.46 per 1000 (95% CI, 0.43–0.49). In 2009, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes was 1.20 per 1000 among American Indian youth (95% CI, 0.96–1.51); 1.06 per 1000 among black youth (95% CI, 0.93–1.22); 0.79 per 1000 among Hispanic youth (95% CI, 0.70–0.88); and 0.17 per 1000 among white youth (95% CI, 0.15–0.20). Significant increases occurred between 2001 and 2009 in both sexes, all age-groups, and in white, Hispanic, and black youth, with no significant changes for Asian Pacific Islanders and American Indians. Adjusted for completeness of ascertainment, there was a 30.5% (95% CI, 17.3%–45.1%) overall increase in type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Between 2001 and 2009 in 5 areas of the United States, the prevalence of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes among children and adolescents increased. Further studies are required to determine the causes of these increases
    corecore