scholarly journals Evaluation of Non-Laboratory and Laboratory Prediction Models for Current and Future Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-Sectional and Retrospective Cohort Study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e0156155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang Ho Ahn ◽  
Ji Won Yoon ◽  
Seokyung Hahn ◽  
Min Kyong Moon ◽  
Kyong Soo Park ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther H. G. Park ◽  
Frances O’Brien ◽  
Fiona Seabrook ◽  
Jane Elizabeth Hirst

Abstract Background There is increasing pressure to get women and babies home rapidly after birth. Babies born to mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) currently get 24-h inpatient monitoring. We investigated whether a low-risk group of babies born to mothers with GDM could be defined for shorter inpatient hypoglycaemia monitoring. Methods Observational, retrospective cohort study conducted in a tertiary maternity hospital in 2018. Singleton, term babies born to women with GDM and no other risk factors for hypoglycaemia, were included. Capillary blood glucose (BG) testing and clinical observations for signs of hypoglycaemia during the first 24-h after birth. BG was checked in all babies before the second feed. Subsequent testing occurred if the first result was < 2.0 mmol/L, or clinical suspicion developed for hypoglycaemia. Neonatal hypoglycaemia, defined as either capillary or venous glucose ≤ 2.0 mmol/L and/or clinical signs of neonatal hypoglycaemia requiring oral or intravenous dextrose (lethargy, abnormal feeding behaviour or seizures). Results Fifteen of 106 babies developed hypoglycaemia within the first 24-h. Maternal and neonatal characteristics were not predictive. All babies with hypoglycaemia had an initial capillary BG ≤ 2.6 mmol/L (Area under the ROC curve (AUC) 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.91–1.0). This result was validated on a further 65 babies, of whom 10 developed hypoglycaemia, in the first 24-h of life. Conclusion Using the 2.6 mmol/L threshold, extended monitoring as an inpatient could have been avoided for 60% of babies in this study. Whilst prospective validation is needed, this approach could help tailor postnatal care plans for babies born to mothers with GDM.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. e016546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesus Maria Aranaz Andrés ◽  
Ramon Limón Ramírez ◽  
Carlos Aibar Remón ◽  
Maria Teresa Gea-Velázquez de Castro ◽  
Francisco Bolúmar ◽  
...  

BackgroundAdverse events (AEs) epidemiology is the first step to improve practice in the healthcare system. Usually, the preferred method used to estimate the magnitude of the problem is the retrospective cohort study design, with retrospective reviews of the medical records. However this data collection involves a sophisticated sampling plan, and a process of intensive review of sometimes very heavy and complex medical records. Cross-sectional survey is also a valid and feasible methodology to study AEs.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to compare AEs detection using two different methodologies: cross-sectional versus retrospective cohort design.SettingSecondary and tertiary hospitals in five countries: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru.ParticipantsThe IBEAS Study is a cross-sectional survey with a sample size of 11 379 patients. The retrospective cohort study was obtained from a 10% random sample proportional to hospital size from the entire IBEAS Study population.MethodsThis study compares the 1-day prevalence of the AEs obtained in the IBEAS Study with the incidence obtained through the retrospective cohort study.ResultsThe prevalence of patients with AEs was 10.47% (95% CI 9.90 to 11.03) (1191/11 379), while the cumulative incidence of the retrospective cohort study was 19.76% (95% CI 17.35% to 22.17%) (215/1088). In both studies the highest risk of suffering AEs was seen in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. Comorbid patients and patients with medical devices showed higher risk.ConclusionThe retrospective cohort design, although requires more resources, allows to detect more AEs than the cross-sectional design.


Author(s):  
Sumyia Mehrin M. D. Abulkalam ◽  
Mai Kadi ◽  
Mahmoud A. Gaddoury ◽  
Wallaa Khalid Albishi

Background: The association between tuberculosis (TB) and diabetes mellitus (DM) is re-emerging with the epidemic of type II diabetes. Both TB and DM were of the top 10 causes of death.[1] This study explores diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for developing the different antitubercular drug-resistant (DR) patterns among TB patients.  Methods: A retrospective cohort study has been conducted on all TB cases reported to the King Abdul Aziz University Hospital, Jeddah, between January 2012 to January 2021. All culture-confirmed and PCR-positive TB cases were included in this study. Categorical baseline characteristic of TB patient has been compared with DM status by using Fisher's exact and Pearson chi-square test. The univariable and multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate the association between DM and different drug resistance patterns.  Results: Of the total 695 diagnosed TB patients, 92 (13.24%) are resistant to 1st line anti TB drugs. Among 92 DR-TB patients, 36 (39.13%) are diabetic. The percentage of different patterns of DR-TB with DM, in the case of mono DR (12.09%), poly DR (4.19%) MDR (0.547%). As a risk factor, DM has a significant association with DR-TB, mono drug-resistant, and pyrazinamide-resistant TB (P-value <0.05). The MDR and PDR separately do not show any significant association with DM, but for further analysis, it shows a significant association with DM when we combined.  Conclusion: Our study identified diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for developing DR-TB. Better management of DM and TB infection caring programs among DM patients might improve TB control and prevent DR-TB development in KSA.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document