Open AccessPrevalence of dysglycaemia in rural Andhra Pradesh: 2005, 2010, and 2014
Author(s) -
Affan Eshan T.,
Praveen Devarsetty,
Wu Jason H.Y.,
Chow Clara K.,
Peiris David,
Patel Anushka,
Neal Bruce C.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of diabetes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.949
H-Index - 43
eISSN - 1753-0407
pISSN - 1753-0393
DOI - 10.1111/1753-0407.12362
Subject(s) - medicine , prediabetes , confidence interval , diabetes mellitus , body mass index , impaired fasting glucose , demography , type 2 diabetes , impaired glucose tolerance , endocrinology , sociology
Background Communities in rural Andhra Pradesh may be at increasing risk of diabetes. In the present study we analyzed three cross‐sectional studies over 9 years to estimate the changing prevalence of dysglycemia (diabetes and prediabetes). Methods The 2005 study sampled 4535 individuals from 20 villages, the 2010 study sampled 4024 individuals from 14 villages, and the 2014 project of 62 254 individuals sought to include all adults aged 40–85 years from 54 villages. Blood glucose levels were estimated using a hand‐held device in 2005 and 2014 and using HbA1c dried blood spots in 2010. Results In primary analyses restricted to assays based on fasting samples (2005, n = 3243; 2014, n = 749), the prevalence estimates for dysglycemia were 53.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51.8%–55.7%) in 2005 and 62.0% (95% CI 58.5%–65.4%) in 2014 ( P < 0.001). Over the same period, mean body mass index (BMI) increased from 22.2 to 24.3 kg/m 2 (mean difference 2.1 kg/m 2 ; 95% CI 2.0–2.2 kg/m 2 ; P < 0.001). In secondary analyses using data from all participants (2005, n = 4535; 2010, n = 4024; 2014, n = 62 254), regardless of measurement technique, the estimated prevalence of dysglycemia was 53.9% (95% CI 52.0%–55.9%) in 2005, 50.5% (95% CI 46.1%–54.9%) in 2010, and 41.3% (95% CI 40.9%–41.7%) in 2014 ( P < 0.001). Conclusions The prevalence of dysglycemia was high at every assessment using every measurement method. Dysglycemia in this population is most likely to have risen with the rise in BMI. The decline in prevalence suggested by the secondary analyses was likely due to confounding from the different assessment methods.