ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of diabetes is increasing rapidly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), urgently requiring detailed evidence to guide the response of health systems to this epidemic. In an effort to understand at what step in the diabetes care continuum individuals are lost to care, and how this varies between countries and population groups, this study examined health system performance for diabetes among adults in 28 LMICs using a cascade of care approach. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We pooled individual participant data from nationally representative surveys done between 2008 and 2016 in 28 LMICs. Diabetes was defined as fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/l (126 mg/dl), random plasma glucose ≥ 11.1 mmol/l (200 mg/dl), HbA1c ≥ 6.5%, or reporting to be taking medication for diabetes. Stages of the care cascade were as follows: tested, diagnosed, lifestyle advice and/or medication given ("treated"), and controlled (HbA1c < 8.0% or equivalent). We stratified cascades of care by country, geographic region, World Bank income group, and individual-level characteristics (age, sex, educational attainment, household wealth quintile, and body mass index [BMI]). We then used logistic regression models with country-level fixed effects to evaluate predictors of (1) testing, (2) treatment, and (3) control. The final sample included 847,413 adults in 28 LMICs (8 low income, 9 lower-middle income, 11 upper-middle income). Survey sample size ranged from 824 in Guyana to 750,451 in India. The prevalence of diabetes was 8.8% (95% CI: 8.2%-9.5%), and the prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was 4.8% (95% CI: 4.5%-5.2%). Health system performance for management of diabetes showed large losses to care at the stage of being tested, and low rates of diabetes control. Total unmet need for diabetes care (defined as the sum of those not tested, tested but undiagnosed, diagnosed but untreated, and treated but with diabetes not controlled) was 77.0% (95% CI: 74.9%-78.9%). Performance along the care cascade was significantly better in upper-middle income countries, but across all World Bank income groups, only half of participants with diabetes who were tested achieved diabetes control. Greater age, educational attainment, and BMI were associated with higher odds of being tested, being treated, and achieving control. The limitations of this study included the use of a single glucose measurement to assess diabetes, differences in the approach to wealth measurement across surveys, and variation in the date of the surveys. CONCLUSIONS: The study uncovered poor management of diabetes along the care cascade, indicating large unmet need for diabetes care across 28 LMICs. Performance across the care cascade varied by World Bank income group and individual-level characteristics, particularly age, educational attainment, and BMI. This policy-relevant analysis can inform country-specific interventions and offers a baseline by which future progress can be measured.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/economics , Diabetes Mellitus/economics , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Health Services Needs and Demand/economics , Health Surveys/economics , Poverty/economics , Adolescent , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Female , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Health Surveys/trends , Humans , Income/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Poverty/trends , Young AdultABSTRACT
Evidence on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor prevalence among adults living below the World Bank's international line for extreme poverty (those with income <$1.90 per day) globally is sparse. Here we pooled individual-level data from 105 nationally representative household surveys across 78 countries, representing 85% of people living in extreme poverty globally, and sorted individuals by country-specific measures of household income or wealth to identify those in extreme poverty. CVD risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, smoking, obesity and dyslipidaemia) were present among 17.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16.7-18.3%), 4.0% (95% CI 3.6-4.5%), 10.6% (95% CI 9.0-12.3%), 3.1% (95% CI 2.8-3.3%) and 1.4% (95% CI 0.9-1.9%) of adults in extreme poverty, respectively. Most were not treated for CVD-related conditions (for example, among those with hypertension earning <$1.90 per day, 15.2% (95% CI 13.3-17.1%) reported taking blood pressure-lowering medication). The main limitation of the study is likely measurement error of poverty level and CVD risk factors that could have led to an overestimation of CVD risk factor prevalence among adults in extreme poverty. Nonetheless, our results could inform equity discussions for resource allocation and design of effective interventions.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Poverty , Humans , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/economics , Adult , Prevalence , Male , Middle Aged , Female , Risk Factors , Hypertension/epidemiology , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Obesity/epidemiology , Aged , Smoking/epidemiology , Young Adult , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is a rapidly growing health problem in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), but empirical data on its prevalence and relationship to socioeconomic status are scarce. We estimated diabetes prevalence and the subset with undiagnosed diabetes in 29 LMICs and evaluated the relationship of education, household wealth, and BMI with diabetes risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We pooled individual-level data from 29 nationally representative surveys conducted between 2008 and 2016, totaling 588,574 participants aged ≥25 years. Diabetes prevalence and the subset with undiagnosed diabetes was calculated overall and by country, World Bank income group (WBIG), and geographic region. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate relative risk (RR). RESULTS: Overall, prevalence of diabetes in 29 LMICs was 7.5% (95% CI 7.1-8.0) and of undiagnosed diabetes 4.9% (4.6-5.3). Diabetes prevalence increased with increasing WBIG: countries with low-income economies (LICs) 6.7% (5.5-8.1), lower-middle-income economies (LMIs) 7.1% (6.6-7.6), and upper-middle-income economies (UMIs) 8.2% (7.5-9.0). Compared with no formal education, greater educational attainment was associated with an increased risk of diabetes across WBIGs, after adjusting for BMI (LICs RR 1.47 [95% CI 1.22-1.78], LMIs 1.14 [1.06-1.23], and UMIs 1.28 [1.02-1.61]). CONCLUSIONS: Among 29 LMICs, diabetes prevalence was substantial and increased with increasing WBIG. In contrast to the association seen in high-income countries, diabetes risk was highest among those with greater educational attainment, independent of BMI. LMICs included in this analysis may be at an advanced stage in the nutrition transition but with no reversal in the socioeconomic gradient of diabetes risk.