4.3 Article

High prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed polyneuropathy in subjects with and without diabetes participating in a nationwide educational initiative (PROTECT study)

期刊

JOURNAL OF DIABETES AND ITS COMPLICATIONS
卷 29, 期 8, 页码 998-1002

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2015.09.008

关键词

Polyneuropathy; Diagnosis; Screening; Foot care; Glycemic control; Peripheral arterial disease; PROTECT study

资金

  1. Worwag Pharma, Boblingen, Germany
  2. Ministry of Science and Research of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia (MIWFNRW)
  3. German Federal Ministry of Health (BMG)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: Since neuropathy screening may be underutilized in primary care practice, we conducted a nationwide educational initiative to determine the prevalence of diagnosed and previously undiagnosed polyneuropathy. Methods: Among 1017 individuals participating in the initiative, 983 with complete data were analyzed, 359 of whom had no diabetes by history (ND), 80 had type 1 diabetes, and 544 had type 2 diabetes. Polyneuropathy was assessed by history and foot examination including pressure, temperature, and vibration perception and was classified as possible, probable, and severe. Foot pulses and HbA1c were determined in subsets of participants. Results: Polyneuropathy was detected in 53.8% of ND, 43.8% of type 1, and 55.6% of type 2 diabetes subjects and was associated with higher age. In a subset of participants with polyneuropathy, the latter was declared as previously undiagnosed by 79.1% of ND, 35.7% of type 1, and 61.5% of type 2 diabetes participants. After adjustment for age and sex, prevalent polyneuropathy was associated with peripheral arterial disease. Conclusions: More than half of subjects with and without diabetes participating in an educational initiative had polyneuropathy which was reported as previously undiagnosed by two thirds. Effective strategies to avoid underdiagnosis of neuropathy and to improve preventive foot care should be implemented. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据