Urban-Rural Differences in the Prevalence of Diabetes Among Adults in Haryana, India: The ICMR-INDIAB Study (ICMR-INDIAB-18).

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes is a multifactorial disease with far-reaching consequences. Environmental factors, such as urban or rural residence, influence its prevalence and associated comorbidities. Haryana-a north Indian state-has undergone rapid urbanisation, and part of it is included in the National Capital Region (NCR). The primary aim of the study is to estimate the prevalence of diabetes in Haryana with urban-rural, NCR and non-NCR regional stratification and assess the factors affecting the likelihood of having diabetes among adults. METHODS: This sub-group analysis of the Indian Council of Medical Research-India Diabetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study (a nationally representative cross-sectional population-based survey) was done for Haryana using data from 3722 participants. The dependent variable was diabetes, while residence in NCR/non-NCR and urban-rural areas were prime independent variables. Weighted prevalence was estimated using state-specific sampling weights and standardized using National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5) study weights. Associations were depicted using bivariate analysis, and factors describing the likelihood of living with diabetes were explored using a multivariable binary logistic regression analysis approach. RESULTS: Overall, the weighted prevalence of diabetes in Haryana was higher than the national average (12.4% vs. 11.4%). The prevalence was higher in urban (17.9%) than in rural areas (9.5%). The prevalence of diabetes in rural areas was higher in the NCR region, while that of prediabetes was higher in rural non-NCR region. Urban-rural participants' anthropometric measurements and biochemical profiles depicted non-significant differences. Urban-rural status, age and physical activity levels were the most significant factors that affected the likelihood of living with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis provides robust prevalence estimates highlighting the urban-rural disparities. Urban areas continue to have a high prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes; rural areas depict a much higher prevalence of prediabetes than diabetes. With the economic transition rapidly bridging the gap between urban and rural populations, health policymakers should plan efficient strategies to tackle the diabetes epidemic.

Evaluation of Madras Diabetes Research Foundation-Indian Diabetes Risk Score in detecting undiagnosed diabetes in the Indian population: Results from the Indian Council of Medical Research-INdia DIABetes population-based study (INDIAB-15).

Background & objectives: Screening of individuals for early detection and identification of undiagnosed diabetes can help in reducing the burden of diabetic complications. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of Madras Diabetes Research Foundation (MDRF)-Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) to screen for undiagnosed type 2 diabetes in a large representative population in India. Methods: Data were acquired from the Indian Council of Medical Research-INdia DIABetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study, a large national survey that included both urban and rural populations from 30 states/union territories in India. Stratified multistage design was followed to obtain a sample of 113,043 individuals (94.2% response rate). MDRF-IDRS used four simple parameters, viz. age, waist circumference, family history of diabetes and physical activity to detect undiagnosed diabetes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) with area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess the performance of MDRF-IDRS. Results: We identified that 32.4, 52.7 and 14.9 per cent of the general population were under high-, moderate- and low-risk category of diabetes. Among the newly diagnosed individuals with diabetes [diagnosed by oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)], 60.2, 35.9 and 3.9 per cent were identified under high-, moderate- and low-risk categories of IDRS. The ROC-AUC for the identification of diabetes was 0.697 (95% confidence interval: 0.684-0.709) for urban population and 0.694 (0.684-0.704) for rural, as well as 0.693 (0.682-0.705) for males and 0.707 (0.697-0.718) for females. MDRF-IDRS performed well when the population were sub-categorized by state or by regions. Interpretation & conclusions: Performance of MDRF-IDRS is evaluated across the nation and is found to be suitable for easy and effective screening of diabetes in Asian Indians.

Metabolic non-communicable disease health report of India: the ICMR-INDIAB national cross-sectional study (ICMR-INDIAB-17).

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable disease (NCD) rates are rapidly increasing in India with wide regional variations. We aimed to quantify the prevalence of metabolic NCDs in India and analyse interstate and inter-regional variations. METHODS: The Indian Council of Medical Research-India Diabetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study, a cross-sectional population-based survey, assessed a representative sample of individuals aged 20 years and older drawn from urban and rural areas of 31 states, union territories, and the National Capital Territory of India. We conducted the survey in multiple phases with a stratified multistage sampling design, using three-level stratification based on geography, population size, and socioeconomic status of each state. Diabetes and prediabetes were diagnosed using the WHO criteria, hypertension using the Eighth Joint National Committee guidelines, obesity (generalised and abdominal) using the WHO Asia Pacific guidelines, and dyslipidaemia using the National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. FINDINGS: A total of 113 043 individuals (79 506 from rural areas and 33 537 from urban areas) participated in the ICMR-INDIAB study between Oct 18, 2008 and Dec 17, 2020. The overall weighted prevalence of diabetes was 11·4% (95% CI 10·2-12·5; 10 151 of 107 119 individuals), prediabetes 15·3% (13·9-16·6; 15 496 of 107 119 individuals), hypertension 35·5% (33·8-37·3; 35 172 of 111 439 individuals), generalised obesity 28·6% (26·9-30·3; 29 861 of 110 368 individuals), abdominal obesity 39·5% (37·7-41·4; 40 121 of 108 665 individuals), and dyslipidaemia 81·2% (77·9-84·5; 14 895 of 18 492 of 25 647). All metabolic NCDs except prediabetes were more frequent in urban than rural areas. In many states with a lower human development index, the ratio of diabetes to prediabetes was less than 1. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of diabetes and other metabolic NCDs in India is considerably higher than previously estimated. While the diabetes epidemic is stabilising in the more developed states of the country, it is still increasing in most other states. Thus, there are serious implications for the nation, warranting urgent state-specific policies and interventions to arrest the rapidly rising epidemic of metabolic NCDs in India. FUNDING: Indian Council of Medical Research and Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.

Variations in glycated haemoglobin with age among individuals with normal glucose tolerance: Implications for diagnosis and treatment-Results from the ICMR-INDIAB population-based study (INDIAB-12).

AIM: To report on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) values among individuals with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) at different age groups, using data acquired from a large national survey in India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on glycaemic parameters at different age groups were obtained from the Indian Council of Medical Research-INdia DIABetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study, in adults aged ≥ 20 years representing all parts of India. Age-wise distribution of HbA1c was assessed among individuals with NGT (n = 14,222) confirmed by an oral glucose tolerance test using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Results were validated in another large epidemiological study (n = 1077) conducted in Chennai, India. RESULTS: Among NGT individuals, HbA1c increased gradually with age from 5.16 ± 0.71% (33 mmol/mol) in the age group of 20-29 years to 5.49 ± 0.69% (37 mmol/mol) in those aged 70 + years. In the validation study, conducted in another study population, HbA1c was 5.35 ± 0.43% (35 mmol/mol) in age group of 20-29 years and 5.74 ± 0.50% (39 mmol/mol) in those aged 70 and above. In the INDIAB study, for every decadal increase in age, there is a 0.08% increase in HbA1c and this increase was more significant in females (females: 0.10% vs. males: 0.06%) and in urban (urban: 0.10% vs. rural: 0.08%) population. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c levels increase steadily with age. This suggests that age-specific cutoffs be used while utilizing HbA1c to diagnose diabetes and prediabetes, so as to minimize the risk of overdiagnosis and unnecessary initiation of treatment in elderly people who could have physiological increase in HbA1c levels.

Prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes in 15 states of India: results from the ICMR-INDIAB population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have not adequately captured the heterogeneous nature of the diabetes epidemic in India. The aim of the ongoing national Indian Council of Medical Research-INdia DIABetes study is to estimate the national prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes in India by estimating the prevalence by state. METHODS: We used a stratified multistage design to obtain a community-based sample of 57 117 individuals aged 20 years or older. The sample population represented 14 of India's 28 states (eight from the mainland and six from the northeast of the country) and one union territory. States were sampled in a phased manner: phase I included Tamil Nadu, Chandigarh, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra, sampled between Nov 17, 2008, and April 16, 2010; phase II included Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Karnataka, and Punjab, sampled between Sept 24, 2012, and July 26, 2013; and the northeastern phase included Assam, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura, Manipur, and Meghalaya, with sampling done between Jan 5, 2012, and July 3, 2015. Capillary oral glucose tolerance tests were used to diagnose diabetes and prediabetes in accordance with WHO criteria. Our methods did not allow us to differentiate between type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The prevalence of diabetes in different states was assessed in relation to socioeconomic status (SES) of individuals and the per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) of each state. We used multiple logistic regression analysis to examine the association of various factors with the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes. FINDINGS: The overall prevalence of diabetes in all 15 states of India was 7·3% (95% CI 7·0-7·5). The prevalence of diabetes varied from 4·3% in Bihar (95% CI 3·7-5·0) to 10·0% (8·7-11·2) in Punjab and was higher in urban areas (11·2%, 10·6-11·8) than in rural areas (5·2%, 4·9-5·4; p<0·0001) and higher in mainland states (8·3%, 7·9-8·7) than in the northeast (5·9%, 5·5-6·2; p<0·0001). Overall, 1862 (47·3%) of 3938 individuals identified as having diabetes had not been diagnosed previously. States with higher per-capita GDP seemed to have a higher prevalence of diabetes (eg, Chandigarh, which had the highest GDP of US$ 3433, had the highest prevalence of 13·6%, 12.8-15·2). In rural areas of all states, diabetes was more prevalent in individuals of higher SES. However, in urban areas of some of the more affluent states (Chandigarh, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu), diabetes prevalence was higher in people with lower SES. The overall prevalence of prediabetes in all 15 states was 10·3% (10·0-10·6). The prevalence of prediabetes varied from 6·0% (5·1-6·8) in Mizoram to 14·7% (13·6-15·9) in Tripura, and the prevalence of impaired fasting glucose was generally higher than the prevalence of impaired glucose tolerance. Age, male sex, obesity, hypertension, and family history of diabetes were independent risk factors for diabetes in both urban and rural areas. INTERPRETATION: There are large differences in diabetes prevalence between states in India. Our results show evidence of an epidemiological transition, with a higher prevalence of diabetes in low SES groups in the urban areas of the more economically developed states. The spread of diabetes to economically disadvantaged sections of society is a matter of great concern, warranting urgent preventive measures. FUNDING: Indian Council of Medical Research and Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.