Clinical and medication profiles stratified by household income in patients referred for diabetes care

BACKGROUND: Low income individuals with diabetes are at particularly high risk for poor health outcomes. While specialized diabetes care may help reduce this risk, it is not currently known whether there are significant clinical differences across income groups at the time of referral. The objective of this study is to determine if the clinical profiles and medication use of patients referred for diabetes care differ across income quintiles. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted using a Canadian, urban, Diabetes Education Centre (DEC) database. Clinical information on the 4687 patients referred to the DEC from May 2000 – January 2002 was examined. These data were merged with 2001 Canadian census data on income. Potential differences in continuous clinical parameters across income quintiles were examined using regression models. Differences in medication use were examined using Chi square analyses. RESULTS: Multivariate regression analysis indicated that income was negatively associated with BMI (p < 0.0005) and age (p = 0.023) at time of referral. The highest income quintiles were found to have lower serum triglycerides (p = 0.011) and higher HDL-c (p = 0.008) at time of referral. No significant differences were found in HBA1C, LDL-c or duration of diabetes. The Chi square analysis of medication use revealed that despite no significant differences in HBA1C, the lowest income quintiles used more metformin (p = 0.001) and sulfonylureas (p < 0.0005) than the wealthy. Use of other therapies were similar across income groups, including lipid lowering medications. High income patients were more likely to be treated with diet alone (p < 0.0005). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that low income patients present to diabetes clinic older, heavier and with a more atherogenic lipid profile than do high income patients. Overall medication use was higher among the lower income group suggesting that differences in clinical profiles are not the result of under-treatment, thus invoking lifestyle factors as potential contributors to these findings

Quality of life in female myocardial infarction survivors: a comparative study with a randomly selected general female population cohort

Background: A substantial burden associated with MI has been reported. Thus, how survivors experience their quality of life (QOL) is now being given increasing attention. However, few studies have involved women and a comparison with the general population. The aims of this study were to determine the QOL of female MI survivors, to investigate whether their QOL differed from that of the general population, and to evaluate the clinical significance of the findings. Methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were performed; on female MI survivors and the general Norwegian population. The MI survey included women aged 62–80 years, three months to five years after their MI. One hundred and forty-five women responded, yielding a response rate of 60%. A subset of women in the same age range (n = 156) was drawn from a study of 1893 randomly selected Norwegian citizens. QOL was measured in both groups with the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument Abbreviated (WHOQOL-BREF). Results: The majority (54%) of the female MI survivors presented with ST-elevation in their ECG, 31% received thrombolysis, and 38% had reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Female MI survivors reported significantly lower satisfaction with general health (p = 0.020) and overall QOL (p = 0.017) than women from the general population. This was also the case for the physical and environmental QOL domains (p < 0.001), but not for the psychological and social relationship domains. Estimated effect sizes between the two groups of participants ranged from 0.1 to -0.6. Conclusion: The burden of MI significantly affects the physical health of elderly women. Still, female MI survivors fare as well as the general female population on psychosocial QOL domains. Action should be taken not only to support women's physical needs but also to reinforce their strengths in order to maintain optimal QOL