Logo of Robert Koch InstituteLogo of Robert Koch Institute
Publication Server of Robert Koch Instituteedoc
de|en
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • Artikel in Fachzeitschriften
  • View Item
2020-10-16Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001707
Factors associated with undiagnosed type 2 diabetesin Germany: results from German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults 2008-2011
Du, Yong
Baumert, Jens
Paprott, Rebecca
Teti, Andrea
Heidemann, Christin
Scheidt-Nave, Christa
Introduction To identify characteristics of people with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) among adults in Germany. Research design and methods The study population comprised participants aged 40–79 years of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults 2008–2011. Glycemic status was categorized as undiagnosed T2D (glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%), n=135), diagnosed T2D (n=518) and normoglycemia (HbA1c<48 mmol/mol (6.5%), n=4451). Multinomial logistic regression models including glycemic status as the outcome variable and sociodemographic characteristics, living alone, diabetes risk factors and healthcare services utilization as independent variables were used to identify factors associated with undiagnosed T2D compared with normoglycemia and diagnosed T2D. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported as measure of association between the outcome and independent variables. Results The prevalence of undiagnosed T2D was 2.9% (95% CI 2.2% to 3.9%) at an overall prevalence of 12.3% (11.0% to 13.6%) of persons with undiagnosed or diagnosed T2D. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with undiagnosed as well as diagnosed T2D in comparison to normoglycemia were older age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06, per year, for undiagnosed T2D; OR 1.08, 1.07 to 1.10 for diagnosed T2D), male sex (3.33, 2.18 to 5.07; 1.91, 1.43 to 2.56), obesity (3.47, 2.17 to 5.56; 2.68, 2.04 to 3.52), hypertension (1.66, 1.09 to 2.53; 2.04, 1.42 to 2.95) and parental history of diabetes (2.04, 1.24 to 3.35; 3.16, 2.30 to 4.34). Variables independently associated with undiagnosed T2D but not diagnosed T2D included living alone (2.20; 1.36 to 3.56) and not seeing a doctor within the past year (2.57; 1.34 to 4.93). People with undiagnosed T2D were further younger and more likely to be male sex and reside in the western part of Germany than people with diagnosed T2D. Conclusion Apart from major known risk factors of diabetes, characteristics specific to undiagnosed diabetes among adults in Germany will serve to inform the national education and communication strategy on diabetes mellitus in Germany.
Files in this item
Thumbnail
e001707.full.pdf — Adobe PDF — 331.6 Kb
MD5: adc6f5a0772bfb20b8a30ff11effa012
Cite
BibTeX
EndNote
RIS
(CC BY-NC 3.0 DE) Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell 3.0 Deutschland(CC BY-NC 3.0 DE) Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell 3.0 Deutschland(CC BY-NC 3.0 DE) Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell 3.0 Deutschland
Details
Terms of Use Imprint Policy Data Privacy Statement Contact

The Robert Koch Institute is a Federal Institute

within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health

© Robert Koch Institute

All rights reserved unless explicitly granted.

 
DOI
10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001707
Permanent URL
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001707
HTML
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001707">https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001707</a>