Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Context: In patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infection, diabetes is associated with poor COVID-19 prognosis. However, case detection strategy is divergent and reported prevalence varies from 5% to 35%.
Objective: We examined how far the choice of screening tools affects the detection rate of dysglycemia and in consequence the estimation of diagnosis-associated risk for moderate (mo) or severe (s) COVID-19.
Methods: Non-intensive care unit inpatients with COVID-19 were screened systematically at admission for diabetes (D) and prediabetes (PreD) by glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (A), random blood glucose (B), and known history (C) from November 1, 2020 to March 8, 2021. Dysglycemia rate and effect on COVID-19 outcome were analyzed in 2 screening strategies (ABC vs BC).
Results: A total of 578 of 601 (96.2%) of admitted patients were screened and analyzed. In ABC, prevalence of D and PreD was 38.2% and 37.5%, respectively. D was significantly associated with an increased risk for more severe COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] [moCOVID-19]: 2.27, 95% CI, 1.16-4.46 and aOR [sCOVID-19]: 3.26, 95% CI, 1.56-6.38). Patients with PreD also presented more often with more severe COVID-19 than those with normoglycemia (aOR [moCOVID-19]: 1.76, 95% CI, 1.04-2.97 and aOR [sCOVID-19]: 2.41, 95% CI, 1.37-4.23). Screening with BC failed to identify only 96% of PreD (206/217) and 26.2% of D diagnosis (58/221) and missed associations of dysglycemia and COVID-19 severity.
Conclusion: Pandemic conditions may hamper dysglycemia detection rate and in consequence the awareness of individual patient risk for COVID-19 severity. A systematic diabetes screening including HbA1c reduces underdiagnosis of previously unknown or new-onset dysglycemia, and enhances the quality of risk estimation and access of patients at risk to a diabetes-specific intervention.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9620726 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgac590 | DOI Listing |