Mean age and body mass index at type 2 diabetes diagnosis: Pooled analysis of 56 health surveys across income groups and world regions.

BACKGROUND: Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) targets people aged 35+ years and those with overweight/obesity. With mounting evidence on young-onset T2DM and T2DM patients with lean phenotypes, it is worth revising the screening criteria to include younger and leaner adults. We quantified the mean age and body mass index (BMI; kg/m2 ) at T2DM diagnosis in 56 countries. METHODS: Descriptive cross-sectional analysis of WHO STEPS surveys. We analysed adults (25-69 years) with new T2DM diagnosis (not necessarily T2DM onset) as per fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dL measured during the survey. For people with new T2DM diagnosis, we summarized the mean age and the proportion of each five-year age group; also, we summarized the mean BMI and the proportion of mutually exclusive BMI categories. RESULTS: There were 8695 new T2DM patients. Overall, the mean age at T2DM diagnosis was 45.1 years in men and 45.0 years in women; and the mean BMI at T2DM diagnosis was 25.2 in men and 26.9 in women. Overall, in men, 10.3% were 25-29 years and 8.5% were 30-34 years old; in women, 8.6% and 12.5% were 25-29 years and 30-34 years old, respectively. 48.5% of men and 37.3% of women were in the normal BMI category. CONCLUSIONS: A non-negligible proportion of new T2DM patients were younger than 35 years. Many new T2DM patients were in the normal weight range. Guidelines for T2DM screening may consider revising the age and BMI criteria to incorporate young and lean adults.

Mean systolic blood pressure above the control threshold in people with treated uncontrolled hypertension: a pooled, cross-sectional analysis of 55 national health surveys.

Background: The hypertension care cascade has been characterized worldwide, yet it has not been quantified how far above the blood pressure control threshold people with uncontrolled treated hypertension are. We summarized the mean systolic blood pressure (SBP; mmHg) in people treated for hypertension but SBP not <130/80. Methods: We did a cross-sectional analysis of 55 WHO STEPS Surveys (n = 10,658), comprising six world regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, Europe, Southeast Asia and Western Pacific); we only included the most recent survey by country regardless of when it was conducted. Adults, men and women, aged between 25 and 69 years, with self-reported hypertension receiving antihypertensive medication and whose blood pressure was >130/80 mmHg were included. We quantified the mean SBP overall and by socio-demographic (sex, age, urban/rural location, education) and cardiometabolic (current smoking, self-reported diabetes) risk factors. Findings: The lowest SBP was observed in Kuwait (146.6; 95% CI: 143.8-149.4 mmHg) and the highest in Libya (171.9; 95% CI: 167.8-176.0 mmHg). In 29 countries, the SBP was higher in men, and SBP tended to be higher in older groups except in six countries. In 17 countries, the SBP was higher in rural than in urban sites, for example in Turkmenistan the SBP was 162.3 (95% CI: 158.4-166.2) mmHg in rural versus 151.6 (95% CI: 148.7-154.4) mmHg in urban areas. In 25 countries, the SBP was higher in adults with no education, for example in Benin the SBP in people without formal education was 175.3 (95% CI: 168.8-181.9) mmHg versus 156.4 (95% CI: 148.8-164.0) mmHg in people with higher education. Interpretation: Stronger interventions to improve and secure access to effective management are needed in most countries and specific groups, to reach hypertension control in people with hypertension already receiving antihypertensive medication. Funding: The Wellcome Trust International Training Fellowship (214185/Z/18/Z).

Agreement between the laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based WHO cardiovascular risk charts: a cross-sectional analysis of a national health survey in Peru.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the agreement between the cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk predictions computed with the WHO non-laboratory-based model and laboratory-based model in a nationally representative sample of Peruvian adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of a national health survey. METHODS: Absolute CVD risk was computed with the 2019 WHO laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based models. The risk predictions from both models were compared with Bland-Altman plots, Lin's concordance coefficient correlation (LCCC), and kappa statistics, stratified by sex, age, body mass index categories, smoking and diabetes status. RESULTS: 663 people aged 30-59 years were included in the analysis. Overall, there were no substantial differences between the mean CVD risk computed with the laboratory-based model 2.0% (95% CI 1.8% to 2.2%) and the non-laboratory-based model 2.0% (95% CI 1.8% to 2.1%). In the Bland-Altman plots, the limits of agreement were the widest among people with diabetes (-0.21; 4.37) compared with people without diabetes (-1.17; 0.95). The lowest agreement as per the LCCC was also seen in people with diabetes (0.74 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.82)), the same was observed with the kappa statistic (kappa=0.36). In general, agreement between the scores was appropriate in terms of clinical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute cardiovascular predicted risk was similar between the laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based 2019 WHO cardiovascular risk models. Pending validation from longitudinal studies, the non-laboratory-based model (instead of the laboratory-based) could be used when assessing CVD risk in Peruvian population.

Predicted heart age profile across 41 countries: A cross-sectional study of nationally representative surveys in six world regions.

Background: Predicted heart age (PHA) can simplify communicating the absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Few studies have characterized PHA across multiple populations, and none has described whether people with excess PHA are eligible for preventive treatment for CVD. Methods: Pooled analysis of 41 World Health Organization (WHO) STEPS surveys conducted in 41 countries in six world regions between 2013 and 2019. PHA was calculated as per the non-laboratory Framingham risk score in adults without history of CVD. We described the differences between chronological age and PHA, the distribution of PHA, and the proportion of people with excess PHA that were eligible for antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment following the WHO guidelines. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess sociodemographic and health-related variables associated with PHA excess. Findings: 94,655 individuals aged 30-74 years were included. 36% of those aged 30-34 years had a PHA of 30-34 years; 9% of those aged 60-64 years had a PHA of 60-64 years. Countries in Africa had the lowest prevalence of very high PHA (i.e., PHA exceeding chronological age in ≥5 years) and countries in Western Pacific had the highest. ≥50% of the population with PHA excess (i.e., PHA exceeding chronological age in ≥1 year) was not eligible for antihypertensive nor lipid-lowering treatment. Abdominal obesity, high total cholesterol, smoking and having diabetes were associated with higher odds of having PHA excess, whereas higher education and employment were inversely associated with excess PHA. Interpretation: PHA is generally higher than chronological age in LMICs and there are regional disparities. Most people with excess PHA would not be eligible to receive preventive medication. Funding: RMC-L is supported by a Wellcome Trust International Training Fellowship (214185/Z/18/Z).

Simplified hypertension screening methods across 60 countries: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Simplified blood pressure (BP) screening approaches have been proposed. However, evidence is limited to a few countries and has not documented the cardiovascular risk amongst missed hypertension cases, limiting the uptake of these simplified approaches. We quantified the proportion of missed, over-diagnosed, and consistently identified hypertension cases and the 10-year cardiovascular risk in these groups. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used 60 WHO STEPS surveys (cross-sectional and nationally representative; n = 145,174) conducted in 60 countries in 6 world regions between 2004 and 2019. Nine simplified approaches were compared against the standard (average of the last 2 of 3 BP measurements). The 10-year cardiovascular risk was computed with the 2019 World Health Organization Cardiovascular Risk Charts. We used t tests to compare the cardiovascular risk between the missed and over-diagnosed cases and the consistent hypertension cases. We used Poisson multilevel regressions to identify risk factors for missed cases (adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and 10-year cardiovascular risk). Across all countries, compared to the standard approach, the simplified approach that missed the fewest cases was using the second BP reading if the first BP reading was 130-145/80-95 mm Hg (5.62%); using only the second BP reading missed 5.82%. The simplified approach with the smallest over-diagnosis proportion was using the second BP reading if the first BP measurement was ≥140/90 mm Hg (3.03%). In many countries, cardiovascular risk was not significantly different between the missed and consistent hypertension groups, yet the mean was slightly lower amongst missed cases. Cardiovascular risk was positively associated with missed hypertension depending on the simplified approach. The main limitation of the work is the cross-sectional design. CONCLUSIONS: Simplified BP screening approaches seem to have low misdiagnosis rates, and cardiovascular risk could be lower amongst missed cases than amongst consistent hypertension cases. Simplified BP screening approaches could be included in large screening programmes and busy clinics.

Who is getting screened for diabetes according to body mass index and waist circumference categories in Peru? a pooled analysis of national surveys between 2015 and 2019.

BACKGROUND: At the population level we would expect that people with obesity undergo diabetes screening tests more often than people with overweight and much more often than people with normal weight. We described the trends of diabetes screening according to body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) in Peru. METHODS: Pooled analysis of health national surveys (2015-2019); men and women aged 35-70 years. We used relative frequencies to study: among those who have had a glucose test in the last year, how many there were in each BMI and WC category. We fitted a Poisson model to study whether people with high BMI or WC were more likely to have had a glucose test. RESULTS: People with overweight (PR = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.29-1.38), obesity (PR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.51-1.63) and central obesity (PR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.35-1.96) were more likely to have had a glucose test. At the sub-national level, there was one (of twenty-five) region in which men with obesity were more often screened for diabetes than men with overweight and much more than men with normal weight. There were seven regions in which women with obesity were the most often screened for diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with a risk-based prevention approach, people with obesity would be screened for diabetes more often than those with overweight and those with normal weight. This ideal profile was only observed in few regions. Diabetes screening strategies should be strengthened and homogenised, so that they reach those at high risk of diabetes.