4.3 Article

Prevalence of diabetes in Poland: a combined analysis of national databases

Journal

DIABETIC MEDICINE
Volume 36, Issue 10, Pages 1209-1216

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dme.13949

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To assess the number of people with diabetes in Poland using combined national sources and to evaluate the usefulness of data from an insurance system for epidemiological purposes. Methods The data were collected from four sources: 1) 2013 all-billing records of the national insurance system comprising people of all age groups undergoing procedures or receiving services in primary healthcare, specialist practices and hospitals and also those receiving drugs; 2) an epidemiological study, NATPOL, that involved the assessment of people with undiagnosed diabetes; 3) the RECEPTOmetr Sequence study on prescriptions; and 4) regional child diabetes registries. Results In 2013, 1.76 million people (0.98 million women and 0.79 million men) had medical consultations (coded E10-E14) and 2.13 million people (1.19 million women and 0.94 million men) purchased drugs or strip tests for diabetes. A total of 0.04 million people who used medical services did not buy drugs. In total, the number of people with diabetes in the insurance system was 2.16 million (1.21 million women and 0.95 million men), which corresponds to 6.1% (95% CI 6.11-6.14) of women and 5.1% (95% CI 5.12-5.14) of men. Including undiagnosed cases, the total number of people with diabetes in Poland was 2.68 million in 2013. Conclusion The estimated prevalence of diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed cases) in Poland is 6.97%. Data from the national insurance system with full coverage of the population can be treated as a reliable source of information on diseases with well-defined diagnosis and treatment methods, combined with an assessment of the number of undiagnosed individuals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available