Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 

 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

Non-Achievement of Clinical Targets in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Eid, M., and Mafauzy M., and Faridah A.R., (2004) Non-Achievement of Clinical Targets in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Medical Journal of Malaysia, 59 (2). pp. 177-184. ISSN 0300-5283

Full text not available from this repository.

Affiliations

Universiti Sains Malaysia. School of Medical Sciences. Dept. of Chemical Pathology.
Universiti Sains Malaysia. School of Medical Sciences. Dept. of Medicine.
Universiti Sains Malaysia. School of Medical Sciences. Dept. of Chemical Pathology.

Abstract

The study was conducted to determine whether the clinical targets for the control of diabetes recommended by American Diabetes Association can be met in the context of routine diabetes practice. This cross-sectional study was undertaken on 211 type 2 diabetic patients at the Outpatients Diabetes Clinic, Hospital University Sains Malaysia (HUSM) Kubang Kerian, Kelantan between the year 2001 — 2002. Patients physical examination and their medical history as well as their family history were obtained by administering a structured questionnaire. Samples of patients venous blood during fasting were taken and analysed for plasma glucose, glycated haemoglobin and lipid profile. Analysis showed that many patients had comorbidities or complications. A large number of them had poor glycaemic control (73%). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures of 75% and 85% subjects were ≥ 130 and ≥ 80 mmHg, respectively. Body Mass Index (BMI) values of 66% of the patients were outside the clinical target (BMI ≥ 25 in male and ≥ 24 kg/m² in female). The lipid profile showed that 96% of the patients had at least one lipid value outside the clinical target level. In this study, 70% of the patients had total cholesterol ≥ 5.2 mmol/L, 87% had LDL cholesterol ≥ 2.6 mmol/L, 57% had HDL cholesterol less than the normal range, ≤ 1.15 mmol/L in men and ≤ 1.4 mmol/L in women, while 46% had triglycerides ≥ 1.71 mmol/L. Complications of diabetes were observed in 48% of the total number of patients. As for the patients’ systolic blood pressure, age and duration of diabetes were found to have significant effects. Older subjects with a longer duration of diabetes were more hypertensive. Variables that had significant effects on BMI were age, duration of diabetes, glycaemic control and gender. Younger females and newly diagnosed subjects with better glycaemic control (A1C < 7%) were found to have higher BMJ values. The overall clinical targets were suboptimal. The prevalence of hyperlipidaemia and hypertension was high. It is imperative that better treatment strategies and methods be adopted to enhance diabetes control and reduce long term complications of the disease.

Item Type:Journal
Keywords:Type 2 Diabetes, Hypertension, Dyslipidaemia, Body Mass Index
Subjects:R Medicine, Dentistry, Pharmacy, Nursing
ID Code:5997

1. Grundy SM, Benjamin IJ, Burke GL, Chait A, Eckel RH, Howard BV, Mitch W, Smith SC, & Sowers JR. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation 1999; 100: 1134-146.

2. American Diabetes Association, Standards of Medical Care for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus (Position Statement), Diabetes Care 2002; 25(1): 213-29.

3. Bloomgarden ZT. American Diabetes Association Annual Meeting. 1999 (more on cardiovascular disease). Diabetes Care 2000; 23 (6): 845-52.

4. American Diabetes Association. American Diabetes Association (1998). Diabetic retinopathy (position statement). Diabetes Care 1998; 21 (Suppl. 1): S47- S49.

5. American Diabetes Association. Diabetic retinopathy (Position statement). Clinical Diabetes 2001; 19(1): 29-32.

6. American Diabetes Association. Diabetic retinopathy (Position Statement). Diabetes Care 2002; 25 (Suppl.1): S90-S93.

7. American Diabetes Association. Diabetic nephropathy (position statement). Diabetes Care 1998; 21 (Suppl. 1): S50 - S53.

8. American Diabetes Association. Diabetic nephropathy (Position Statement) Diabetes Care 2002; 25 (Suppl. 1): S85 - S89.

9. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. (UKPDS33). Lancet 1998; 352: 837 -53.

10. Bloomgarden ZT. The European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting. 1998 (Complications of diabetes). Diabetes Care 1999; 22 (8): 1364 -370.

11. Bloomgarden ZT. American Diabetes Association Annual Meeting, 1999 (nephropathy and neuropathy). Diabetes Care 2000; 23 (4): 549 - 56.

12. American Diabetes Association. Consensus development conference on the diagnosis of coronary heart disease in people with diabetes (Consensus Statement). Diabetes Care 1998; 21(9): 1551 - 59.

13. American Diabetes Association. Role of cardiovascular risk factors in prevention and treatment of macrovascular disease in diabetes (consensus statement). Diabetes Care 1989; 12 (8): 573-79.

14. American Diabetes Association. Treatment of hypertension in diabetes (consensus statement). Diabetes Care 1993; 16 (10): 1394 - 401.

15. American Diabetes Association. Treatment of hypertension in diabetes (consensus statement). Diabetes Care 1996: 19 (Suppl. 1): S107 - S113.

16. American Diabetes Association. Treatment of hypertension in adults with diabetes (Position Statement). Diabetes Care 2002g: 25 (Suppl. 1):S71 - S73.

17. American Diabetes Association. Treatment of hypertension in adults with diabetes (Position statement). Diabetes Care 2002; 25 (1): 199 - 201.

18. Arauz-Pacheco C, Parrott MA, & Raskin P. The treatment of hypertension in adult patients with diabetes (Technical Review). Diabetes Care 2002; 25 (1): 134- 47.

19. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 38). BMJ 1998; 317: 703 - 13.

20. The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP). Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 2001; 285 (19): 2486-497.

21. Mohamad M, Arshad F, Mohd Noor MI, & Ali R. Prevalence of dyslipidaemia in non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients attending armed forces clinics in Kuala Lumpur. Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr 1997; 6 (3): 203 - 206.

22. Valle T, Koivisto VA, Reunanen A, Kangas T, & Rissanen, A. Glycemic control in patients with diabetes in Finland. Diabetes Care 1999; 22 (4): 575 - 79.

23. Miller CD, Phillips LS, Tate MK, Porwoll JM, Rossman SD, Cronmiller N, & Gebhart SSP. Meeting American Diabetes Association Guidelines in Endocrinologist Practice. Diabetes Care 2000; 23 (4): 444 - 48.

24. Paterson JR, Pettigrew AR, Dominiczak MH, & Small M. Screening for hyperlipidaemia in diabetes mellitus. Relation to glycaemic control. Ann Clin Biochem 1991; 28: 354 - 58.

25. Mafauzy M, Mokhtar N, Wan Muhamad WB, & Musalmah M. Diabetes mellitus and associated cardiovascular risk factors in North-East Malaysia. Asian Pacific Journal of Public Health 1999; 11(1): 16 - 19.

26. Kanters SDJM, Algra A, Bruint TWA, Erkelens DW, & Banga JD. Intensive lipid-lowering strategy in patients with diabetes milletus. Diabetic Medicine 1999: 16: 500 - 508.

27. Mustaffa BE, Wan Mohamad WB, Chan SP, Rokiah P, Mafauzy M, Kumari S, Chandran AA, Ong GKC, Jorgensen LN & Yeo JP. The current status of diabetes management in Malaysia. J ASEAN Fed Endo Soc 1998; 16(2): 1-13.

Repository Staff Only: item control page