The Uptake of Screening for Type 2 Diabetes and Prediabetes by Means of Glycated Hemoglobin versus the Oral Glucose Tolerance Test among 18 to 60-Year-Old People of South Asian Origin: A Comparative Study

• Published in: PloS one 2015-08, Vol.10 (8), p.e0136734-e0136734
• Main Authors: van Valkengoed, Irene G M, Vlaar, Everlina M A, Nierkens, Vera, Middelkoop, Barend J C, Stronks, Karien
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Asian Continental Ancestry Group; Asian people; Blood glucose; Clinical trials; Comparative studies; Dental materials; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus; Diabetes mellitus (non-insulin dependent); Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - blood; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - diagnosis; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - epidemiology; Diabetes research; Diagnosis; Female; Glucose; Glucose tolerance; Glucose Tolerance Test; Glycated Hemoglobin A - metabolism; Health risks; Health services; Hemoglobin; Hemoglobins; Humans; Male; Mass Screening - methods; Materials selection; Measurement; Medical screening; Methods; Middle Aged; Older people; Population; Precision medicine; Prevention; Properties; Public health; Regression analysis; Screening; Studies; Suriname - epidemiology; Systematic review; Type 2 diabetes
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136734

Direct comparisons of the effect of a glycated haemoglobin measurement or an oral glucose tolerance test on the uptake and yield of screening in people of South Asian origin have not been made. We evaluated this in 18 to 60-year-old South Asian Surinamese. We invited 3173 South Asian Surinamese for an oral glucose tolerance test between June 18th 2009- December 31st 2009 and 2012 for a glycated hemoglobin measurement between April 19th 2010-November 11th, 2010. Participants were selected from 48 general practices in The Hague, The Netherlands. We used mixed models regression to analyse differences in response and participation between the groups. We described differences in characteristics of participants and calculated the yield as the percentage of all cases identified, if all invitees had been offered screening with the specified method. The response and participation in the glycated hemoglobin group was higher than in the group offered an oral glucose tolerance test (participation 23.9 vs. 19.3; OR: 1.30, 95%-confidence interval1.01-1.69). After adjustment for age and sex, characteristics of participants were similar for both groups. Overall, glycated hemoglobin identified a similar percentage of type 2 diabetes cases but a higher percentage of prediabetes cases, in the population than the oral glucose tolerance test. We found that glycated hemoglobin and the oral glucose tolerance test may be equally efficient for identification of type 2 diabetes in populations of South Asian origin. However, for programs aimed at identifying people at high risk of type 2 diabetes (i.e. with prediabetes), the oral glucose tolerance test may be a less efficient choice than glycated hemoglobin.