4.3 Article

Prevalence and incidence of Type 2 diabetes and its complications 1996-2003 -: estimates from a Swedish population-based study

期刊

DIABETIC MEDICINE
卷 25, 期 10, 页码 1178-1186

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02541.x

关键词

complications; epidemiology; registers; Type 2 diabetes

资金

  1. Merck Co. Inc

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims To determine the prevalence and incidence of Type 2 diabetes and its complications in Uppsala county, Sweden between 1996 and 2003. Methods Retrospective population-based study of patients with Type 2 diabetes identified in computerized medical records at 26 county primary care centres. Prevalence and incidence of Type 2 diabetes were estimated in the population aged 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79 and >= 80 years. Mortality, prevalence and incidence of complications in patients with Type 2 diabetes were determined through linkage to national inpatient, uraemia and cause-of-death registers. Results Crude prevalence of Type 2 diabetes increased from 2.2 to 3.5% between 1996 and 2003. In the population aged >= 30 years, the age- and sex-adjusted period increase was 53% [odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-1.58]. Crude population incidence was approximately stable after 1997 (3.7 cases/1000 residents in 1997 compared with 3.8/1000 in 2003). Age- and sex-adjusted mortality rates in Type 2 diabetic patients decreased by 4% per year (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.97). Prevalence rates of cardiovascular disease in Type 2 diabetic patients were essentially stable, affecting 13.8% of females and 18.0% of males in 2003. No trend was detected for prevalence of renal failure or incidence of acute myocardial infarction, stroke and amputation. Conclusions Prevalence of Type 2 diabetes increased in Uppsala county between 1996 and 2003 as a consequence of approximately stable incidence since 1997 and declining mortality. Rates of diabetes-related complications, notably cardiovascular disease, continued to impose a substantial burden.

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