metricas
covid
Buscar en
Atención Primaria
Toda la web
Inicio Atención Primaria Los criterios de la ADA infravaloran el impacto de la diabetes en la población ...
Journal Information
Vol. 26. Issue 8.
Pages 517-524 (January 2000)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 26. Issue 8.
Pages 517-524 (January 2000)
Full text access
Los criterios de la ADA infravaloran el impacto de la diabetes en la población española de más alto riesgo
Ada criteria undervalues the diabetes impact on high-risk spanish population
Visits
3025
F. Martín Luján
Corresponding author
fmartin@preus.scs.es

Correspondencia: Área Básica de Salud Reus 1. Camí de Riudoms, 53-55. 43202 Reus (Tarragona).
, B. Costa Pinel, A. Donado-Mazarrón Romero, T. Basora Gallisà, J. Basora Gallisà, J.L. Piñol Moreso, el Grupo de Investigación sobre Intolerancia a la Glucosa (Reus-Tarragona) *
Direcciones de Atención Primaria Reus-Altebrat y Tarragona-Valls. Institut Català de la Salut. Unidad de Diabetes. Hospital Móra d'Ebre y Dirección de Atención Primaria Grupo Sagessa. Tarragona
This item has received
Article information
Objetivos

Investigar la prevalencia de las alteraciones de la homeostasia glucidica en la poblacion de alto riesgo. Determinar la prevalencia de los factores clasicos de riesgo y comparar su rendimiento para el cribado de diabetes segun los criterios OMS y ADA.

Diseno y ambito

Estudio transversal, multicentrico, de deteccion selectiva de la poblacion asistida en 9 centros de atencion primaria y una unidad hospitalaria de diabetes (230.000 habitantes).

Pacientes

Mayores de 40 anos, no gestantes, con uno o mas factores de riesgo para la diabetes (IMC ≥ 30 kg/m2, antecedentes familiares de diabetes, anomalia glucemica previa o ingesta de farmacos hiperglucemiantes).

Mediciones

Se informatizaron edad, sexo y factores de riesgo diabetologico. Se determino la glucemia basal (GB) y a las 2 horas (G2h) de una prueba de tolerancia oral (PTOG). Se calculo el valor predictivo positivo y la odds ratio para cada factor de riesgo. Por medio de curvas ROC (receiver operator characteristics) se identifico el valor de GB que maximiza la sensibilidad y especificidad de la G2h.

Resultados principales

Se evaluaron 580 individuos, 250 varones (43,1%), de edad media 58,1 ± 10,7 anos e IMC 31,2 ± 5,2 kg/m2. Resultaron 132 (22,7%) diagnosticos de diabetes segun la OMS y 79 (13,6%) segun la ADA, pero solo en 53 (9,1%) coincidieron ambos criterios. La GB ≥ 126 mg/dl (7,0 mM), predijo una G2h ≥ 200 mg/dl (11,1 mM) con alta especificidad (94,2%) pero con muy baja sensibilidad (40,2%). Aplicando este nuevo punto de corte basal, el 50% de diabeticos (GB normal con G2h diabetica) no se hubiera diagnosticado. Los valores predictivos para los factores clasicos de riesgo segun los criterios OMS oscilaron entre el 23,4–29,1% y superaron siempre los obtenidos con los criterios ADA (11,6–18,3%; p < 0,01).

Conclusiones

La PTOG continua siendo clave en la deteccion de diabetes, puesto que la capacidad predictiva de la G2h supera ampliamente a la GB. Los criterios ADA infravaloran el impacto de la diabetes precisamente en la poblacion de mas alto riesgo.

Palabras clave:
Atención primaria
Detección
Diabetes mellitus
Diagnóstico
Objective

The main aim was to investigate the prevalence of abnormal glucose homeostasis (impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance and undiagnosed diabetes) on high-risk Spanish population. The second, to determine the prevalence and usefulness of classical risk factors for diabetes screening according WHO and ADA criteria and to evaluate the potential effect of different stepwise strategies.

Design and setting

Cross-sectional, multicentric, selective screening study carried out in primary health care which involved 9 health care centres and 1 diabetes unit (230000 inhabitants).

Patients

Individuals aged > 40 years, non pregnant with at least one major risk factor for diabetes: BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, a first degree relative with diabetes, previous abnormality of glucose tolerance or the use of oral hyperglycaemic drugs for a long time.

Measurements

Database including sex, age and risk factors. Diagnoses were based on measurement of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) followed by a 2h-plasma glucose (2hPG) using a 75 gr. oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Positive predictive value (PPV) and odds ratio were calculated for each risk factor. The FPG concentration which maximised the sensitivity and specificity with respect to the 2hPG was established by means of the ROC-curves (receiver operator characteristics).

Main results

580 individuals were evaluated, 250 males (43.1%), mean age 58.1 ± 10.7 years and BMI 31.2 ± 5.2 kg/m2. A total of 132 (22.7%) individuals presented diabetes according the WHO criteria, 79 (13.6%) according ADA and only 53 (9.1%) according both sets of criteria. FPG ≥ 126 mg/dl (7 mM) predicted a diabetic 2hPG with high specificity (94.2%) but a very low sensitivity (40.2%). If that cut-point was used alone for early screening half the diabetics with normal FPG but with a diabetic 2hPG would not have been diagnosed. According the WHO criteria PPV for classical risk factors oscillated between 23.4–29.1% and were significantly higher than those obtained according ADA criteria (11.6–18.3%; p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The OGTT is still the cornerstone for diabetes screening thus the FPG predictive value greatly decreases the FPG predictive value. ADA criteria undervalues the diabetes impact mainly on high-risk population.

Full text is only aviable in PDF
Bibliografía
[1.]
S.J. Aldinton, E.M. Kohner, A. Nugent.
Retinopathy at entry in the United Kingdom prospective study (UKPDS) of maturity onset diabetes.
Diabet Med, 4 (1987), pp. 355
[2.]
UKPDS Group.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study 6. Complications in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetic patients and their association with different clinical and biochemical risk factors.
Diabetes Research, 13 (1990), pp. 1-11
[3.]
M.A. Charles, B. Balkau, F. Vauzelle-Kervroedan, N. Thibult, E. Eschwege.
Revision of diagnostic criteria for diabetes.
Lancet, 348 (1996), pp. 1657-1658
[4.]
D.R. McCance, R.L. Hanson, D.J. Pettitt, P.H. Bennett, D.R. Hadden, W.C. Knowler.
Diagnosing diabetes mellitus -do we need new criteria?.
Diabetologia, 40 (1997), pp. 247-255
[5.]
M.I. Harris, K.M. Flegal, C.C. Cowie, M.S. Eberhardt, D.E. Goldstein, R.P. Little.
Prevalence of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose and impaired glucose tolerance in US adults. The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994.
Diabetes Care, 21 (1998), pp. 518
[6.]
M.M. Engelgau, T.J. Thompson, W.H. Herman, J.P. Boyle, R.E. Aubert, S.J. Kenny, et al.
Comparison of fasting and 2-hour glucose and HbA1c levels for diagnosing diabetes: diagnosis criteria and performance revisited.
Diabetes Care, 20 (1997), pp. 785-791
[7.]
R.C. Perry, A.D. Baron.
Impaired glucose tolerance Why is it not a disease?.
Diabetes Care, 22 (1999), pp. 883-885
[8.]
D.L. Wingard, C. Scheidt-Nave, E.L. Barret-Connor, J.B. McPhillips.
Prevalence of cardiovascular and renal complications in older adults with normal or impaired glucose tolerance or NIDDM.
Diabetes Care, 16 (1993), pp. 1022-1025
[9.]
Expert Workshop on Impaired Glucose Tolerance.
Diabet Med, 13 (1996), pp. 1-31
[10.]
H.C. Gerstein, S. Yusuf.
Dysglycaemia and risk of cardiovascular disease.
Lancet, 347 (1996), pp. 949-950
[11.]
R. Klein.
Hyperglucemia and microvascular and macrovascular disease in diabetes.
Diabetes Care, 18 (1995),
[12.]
American Diabetes Association.
Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus.
Diabetes Care, 20 (1997), pp. 1183-1197
[13.]
National Diabetes Data Group.
Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance.
Diabetes, 28 (1979), pp. 1039-1057
[14.]
World Health Organization.
World Health Organization Expert Committee on Diabetes Mellitus: Second Report.
[15.]
World Health Organization.
World Health Organization Study Group on Diabetes Mellitus. Second Report.
[16.]
The DECODE Study Group on Behalf of the European Diabetes Epidemilogy Study Group.
Will new diagnostic criteria for diabetes mellitus change phenotype of patients with diabetes? Reanalysis of European epidemiological data.
BMJ, 317 (1998), pp. 371-375
[17.]
The DECODE Study Group on Behalf of the European Diabetes Epidemiology Study Group.
Is fasting glucose sufficient to define diabetes? Epidemiological data from 20 European studies.
Diabetologia, 42 (1999), pp. 647-654
[18.]
K.G.M.M. Alberti.
Zimmet PZ for the WHO Consultation. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Provisional report of a WHO Consultation.
[19.]
X.R. Pan, G.W. Li, Y.H. Hu, J.X. Wang, W.Y. Yang, Z.X. An, et al.
Effect of diet and exercise in preventing NIDDM in people with impaired glucose tolerance: The Da Quing IGT and Diabetes Study.
Diabetes Care, 20 (1997), pp. 537-544
[20.]
J. Eriksson, J. Lindström, T. Valle, S. Aunola, H. Hämäläinen, P. Ilanne-Parikka, et al.
Prevention of type 2 diabetes in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance: the Diabetes Prevention Study (DPS) in Finland.
Diabetologia, 42 (1999), pp. 793-801
[21.]
P.Z. Zimmet.
Diabetes epidemiology as a tool to trigger diabetes research and care.
Diabetologia, 42 (1999), pp. 499-518
[22.]
B. Costa, F. Martín, A. Donado, I. Ricart, R. Pedret.
Daniel J y el Grupo de Investigación sobre Intolerancia a la Glucosa. Detección selectiva de intolerancia a la glucosa y diabetes en atención primaria. El Estudio ITG-Reus (Tarragona).
Aten Primaria, 22 (1998), pp. 71-78
[23.]
B. Costa, F. Martín, A. Donado, F. Parera, J.L. Piñol, J. Basora.
et al y el Grupo de Investigación ITG (Reus-Tarragona). Diabetes ignorada y otras alteraciones del metabolismo glucídico en la población española de alto riesgo. El Estudio ITG.
Med Clin (Barc), 114 (2000), pp. 601-608
[24.]
H. Keen.
Impact of new criteria for diabetes on pattern of disease.
Lancet, 352 (1998), pp. 1000-1001
[25.]
J. Franch, J.C. Álvarez, F. Álvarez, F. Diego, R. Hernández, A. Cueto.
Epidemiología de la diabetes mellitus en la provincia de León.
Med Clin (Barc), 98 (1992), pp. 607-611
[26.]
J. Bayo, C. Sola, F. García, P.M. Latorre, J.A. Vázquez.
Prevalencia de la diabetes mellitus no dependiente de la insulina en Lejona (Vizcaya).
Med Clin (Barc), 101 (1993), pp. 609-612
[27.]
A. Goday, M. Serrano Ríos.
Epidemiología de la diabetes mellitus en España. Revisión critica y nuevas perspectivas.
Med Clin (Barc), 102 (1994), pp. 306-315
[28.]
Consell Assessor sobre la Diabetis a Catalunya.
Prevalença de diabetis mellitus no insulinodependent a Catalunya.
Butlleti Epidemiològic de Catalunya, 18 (1997), pp. 41-43
[29.]
B. Tamayo-Marco, E. Faure-Nogueras, M.J. Roche-Asensio, E. Rubio-Calvo, E. Sánchez-Oriz, J.A. Salvador-Olivan.
Prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance in Aragon, Spain.
Diabetes Care, 20 (1997), pp. 534-536
[30.]
B. Costa, J. Monclús, J.L. Llor, D. Gellida, G. García, a.l. Cugat I et.
y el Grup per a l'Estudi de la Diabetis a Tarragona. Diabetes y trastornos ignorados de la tolerancia a la glucosa en atención primaria. Evidencia mediante detección oportunista.
Aten Primaria, 16 (1995), pp. 532-537
[31.]
T. Mur, J. Franch, J. Morató, A. Mena, M. Vilarrubias, A. Llobera.
Macroangiopatía en la diabetes tipo II El estudio Raval Sud.
Aten Primaria, 16 (1995), pp. 67-72
[32.]
I. Otzet, A. Ocaña, C. Llacer, A.C. Cereijo, J. Morato, J. Franch.
Riesgo cardiovascular y metabolismo de la glucosa: más discrepancias entre las clasificaciones de la OMS-85 y la ADA-97.
Aten Primaria, 24 (1999), pp. 230-231
[33.]
B. Costa, J. Franch, A. Donado, J. Morató, F. Martín, J. Basora.
ITG Research Group. Cardiovascular risk and statistical concordance related to WHO-85 vs. ADA-97 diagnostic categories on highrisk Spanish population.
Diabetes, 48 (1999), pp. 394-395
[34.]
B. Costa, J. Franch, F. Martín, J. Morató, A. Donado, J. Basora, et al.
ITG Research Group. Cardiovascular risk related to WHO/ADA diagnostic categories on high-risk Spanish population.
Diabetologia, 42 (1999), pp. 110
[35.]
I. Fernández, J.L. Martín.
Impacto sociosanitario de los nuevos criterios diagnósticos de la diabetes mellitus tipo 2.
FMC, 5 (1998), pp. 465-470
[36.]
E. Hernández, M. Birulés.
Nuevos criterios en la clasificación y diagnóstico de la diabetes mellitus.
Aten Primaria, 23 (1999), pp. 107-109
[37.]
GedapS (Grupo de Estudio de la Diabetes en la Atención Primaria de Salud).
Societat Catalana de Medicina Familiar i Comunitaria. Guía para el tratamiento de la diabetes tipo 2 en la Atención Primaria.
3.a,
[38.]
M.I. Harris, R.C. Eastman, C.C. Cowie, K.M. Flegal, M.S. Eberhardt.
Comparison of diabetes diagnostic categories in the US population according to 1997 American Diabetes Association and 1980–1985 World Health Organisation diagnostic criteria.
Diabetes Care, 20 (1997), pp. 1859-1862
[39.]
K.G.M.M. Alberti, P.Z. Zimmet.
New diagnostic criteria and classification of diabetes mellitus-again?.
[40.]
J.E. Shaw, M.P. De Courten, A.M. Hodge, D. McCarty, H. Gareboo, P. Chitson, et al.
IGT or IFG for predicting NIDDM Who is right, WHO or ADA?.
Diabetes, 47 (1998), pp. 150
[41.]
P.W. Wahl, P.J. Savage, B.M. Psaty, T.J. Orchard, J.A. Robbins, R.P. Tracy.
Diabetes in older adults: comparison of the 1997 American Diabetes Association Classification of diabetes mellitus with 1985 WHO classification.
Lancet, 352 (1998), pp. 1012-1015
[42.]
B. Costa, J. Franch, F. Martín, J. Morató, A. Donado, J. Basora, et al.
ITG Research Group. Impact of the American Diabetes Association Diagnosis Criteria on High-Risk Spanish Population.
Diab Res Clin Pract, 46 (1999), pp. 75-81
[43.]
B. Costa.
¿Cómo diagnosticaremos en España la diabetes más allá del año 2000?.
Med Clin (Barc), 112 (1999), pp. 572-574
[44.]
European Diabetes Policy Group 1999.
A Desktop Guide to type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Diabet Med, 16 (1999), pp. 716-730
[45.]
UKPDS Group.
Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33).
Lancet, 352 (1998), pp. 837-852
[46.]
UKPDS Group.
Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34).
Lancet, 352 (1998), pp. 854-865
[47.]
UKPDS Group.
Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 38).
BMJ, 317 (1998), pp. 703-713
[48.]
S.F. Dinneen, D. Maldonado, C.L. Leibson, G.G. Klee, H. Li, L.J. Melton, et al.
Effects of changing diagnostic criteria on the risk of developing diabetes.
Diabetes Care, 21 (1998), pp. 1408-1413
[49.]
J.M. Baena, M. Oller, R. Martín, M. Nicolau, A. Altes, C. Iglesia.
Impacto de los nuevos criterios diagnósticos propuestos por la Asociación Americana de Diabetes (ADA-97) sobre la prevalencia diagnóstica de diabetes mellitus tipo 2.
Aten Primaria, 24 (1999), pp. 97-100
[50.]
A. Segura.
Detección no es prevención.
Med Clin (Barc), 105 (1995), pp. 78

Al final del artículo ofrecemos un listado de los miembros del grupo de investigación.

Copyright © 2000. Elsevier España, S.L.. Todos los derechos reservados
Download PDF
Article options
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos