Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
View Point
Viewpoint
White Paper
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
View Point
Viewpoint
White Paper
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Student IJMR
152 (
3
); 308-311
doi:
10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1597_18

Risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus among urban slum population using Indian Diabetes Risk Score

Department of Community Medicine, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagunur, Karimnagar, Telangana, India
Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagunur, Karimnagar, Telangana, India

For correspondence: Dr Vidhya Wilson, Department of Community Medicine, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagunur, Karimnagar 505 417, Telangana, India e-mail: v_burankar@rediffmail.com

Licence

This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Abstract

Background and objectives:

Diabetes has emerged as a major health challenge in India due to a rapid rise in the number of diabetes cases. Early identification of high risk individuals through screening and early interventions in the form of lifestyle modifications and treatment would help in the prevention of diabetes and its complications. This study was done to assess the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in an urban slum population using the Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) and to determine the factors associated with high risk score.

Methods:

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among the urban slum population in North Telangana, India. A total of 136 study participants were selected randomly from the records. A pre-designed and pre-tested structured questionnaire was used for data collection. Assessment of risk of T2DM was done using the IDRS.

Results:

Of the 136 study participants, 101 (74.3%) were at high risk (IDRS ≥60) followed by 32 (23.5%) at moderate risk (IDRS 30-50) and three (2.2%) at low risk (IDRS <30). Sixty two (92.5%) individuals in the age group ≥50 yr were at high risk compared to 34 (63%) in 35-49 yr age group. Most (n=35, 87.5%) of sedentary workers were at high risk compared to those employed in moderate (n=52, 75.4%) and strenuous work (n=14, 51.9%).

Interpretation & conclusions:

Nearly three-fourth (74.3%) of the study participants were at a high risk of developing T2DM. Age, type of occupation, abdominal obesity, general obesity and high blood pressure were the factors significantly associated with high risk IDRS score.

Keywords

Determinants
diabetes
risk
screening
T2DM
urban slums

Globally about 9.3 per cent of adults (i.e. about 463 million people) are living with diabetes1. India ranks second to China for the highest number of diabetes cases in the world. More than half of individuals with diabetes remain unaware of their diabetic status2, thus untreated leading to complications. Low awareness regarding diabetes3 and poor compliance to the management4 are among the major challenges. Genetic susceptibility coupled with fast food culture and sedentary lifestyle5 are the major factors for the rise in diabetes cases in India. Identification of high risk individuals by screening and early interventions would help in the prevention of diabetes and its complications6. The Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS)7 is simple and cost-effective tool for early detection of undiagnosed cases in the community. Hence, the present study was done to assess the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in an urban slum population in southern India using IDRS and to determine the factors associated with high risk score.

Material & Methods

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among urban slum population from June 1 to July 31, 2017 at Sahethnagar, which is an urban field practice area of Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Karimnagar, in North Telangana, India. Of the total 824 households in the area, 136 were selected randomly. One individual from each of these selected households was selected randomly. Individuals aged 30 yr and above with no history of diabetes and willing to participate in the study were included. Informed written consent was obtained from the participants, and approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee was obtained before the commencement of the study.

A pre-designed and pre-tested structured questionnaire was used for data collection. The data comprised socio-demographic variables, variables related to IDRS and measurement of blood pressure (BP) and body mass index (BMI). The IDRS components were scored as follows: age: <35 yr (0 score), 35-49 yr (20 score), and ≥50 yr (30 score); abdominal obesity (waist circumference): <80 cm in females and <90 cm in males (0 score), 80-89 cm in females and 90-99 cm in males (10 score), and ≥90 cm in females and ≥100 cm in males (20 score); physical activity: exercise (regular) plus strenuous work (0 score), exercise (regular) or strenuous work (20 score), and no exercise and sedentary work (30 score); family history of diabetes: no family history (0 score), either parent with diabetes (10 score), and both parents with a history of diabetes (20 score); and individuals with total IDRS of ≥60, 30-50 and <30 were categorized as high, moderate and low risk, respectively8.

The sample size was calculated using OPENEPI software. For a prevalence of 8.7 per cent for diabetes as per the International Diabetes Federation Report9 and 95 per cent confidence level and five per cent absolute precision, the sample size calculated was 127. A total of 136 individuals were included in the study.

Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was done using SPSS software version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Data were analyzed by calculating frequency, percentages, mean, and standard deviation. Pearson's Chi-square test and ANOVA test were used as test of significance.

Results & Discussion

A total of 136 individuals were assessed for the risk of T2DM using IDRS. The socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are as shown in Table I. The mean age of the individuals was 51.20±15.11 yr [median=60, range=30-90 yr] and the male/female ratio was 72:100.

Table I Socio-demographic factors and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus by Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS)
Socio-demographic factors IDRS Total (n=136) P
≥60 (n=101), n (%) 30-50 and <30 (n=35), n (%)
Age group (yr)
<35 5 (33.3) 10 (66.7) 15 <0.001
35-49 34 (63) 20 (37) 54
≥50 62 (92.5) 5 (7.5) 67
Gender
Male 38 (66.7) 19 (33.3) 57 0.08
Female 63 (79.7) 16 (20.3) 79
Education
Illiterate 29 (80.5) 7 (19.4) 36 0.50
Primary 5 (100) 0 (0) 5
Middle school 17 (68) 8 (32) 25
High school 11 (73.3) 4 (26.7) 15
Intermediate/graduate 39 (70.9) 16 (29.1) 55
Occupation
Sedentary 35 (87.5) 5 (12.5) 40 <0.01
Moderate 52 (75.4) 17 (24.6) 69
Strenuous 14 (51.9) 13 (48.1) 27
Socio-economic status16
Class I 15 (83.3) 3 (16.7) 18 0.52
Class II 27 (79.4) 7 (20.6) 34
Class III 25 (67.6) 12 (32.4) 37
Class IV 24 (68.6) 11 (31.4) 35
Class V 10 (83.3) 2 (16.7) 12
Family history of diabetes mellitus
Yes 27 (79.4) 7 (20.6) 34 0.42
No 74 (72.5) 28 (27.5) 102

Majority (n=101, 74.3%) were at a high risk of developing T2DM followed by 23.5 per cent (n=32) at moderate risk. Only three (2.2%) were at low risk. The observations were similar to a study conducted in Bangalore10. Majority of individuals (n=62, 92.5%) of age group ≥50 yr were at high risk compared to 35-49 yr (n=34, 63%; P<0.001). These observations were comparable to a study conducted in Pune11. More females (79.7%) as compared to males (66.7%) were at high risk of diabetes (P<0.08). A study conducted in north India also showed no significant association between gender and risk score12. No significant association was noted between education and risk of diabetes. However, Patil et al11 observed a significant association between low education and high risk status. In the present study, 87.5 per cent individuals with sedentary work were at high risk compared to those in moderate (75.4%) and strenuous work (51.9%) (P<0.01) (Table I). Individuals belonging to socio-economic class I and V (83.3% each) were at high risk of developing T2DM. A higher risk in the lower-middle class was observed in a study13. In the present study, 79.4 per cent of the individuals with a family history of diabetes and 72.5 per cent with no family history were at high risk similar to an earlier study11.

The mean age of the individuals in the high risk category was higher than in moderate and low risk category (P<0.001). Similarly, significantly higher mean systolic (P<0.05) and diastolic BP (P<0.05) was noted among the individuals in high risk category (Table II). Hypertension was a comorbidity in 44.9 per cent diabetics in a study14. The mean waist circumference was significantly more in the high risk group among both men (P<0.001) and women (P<0.001), indicating a greater risk of diabetes in those with abdominal obesity as reported earlier15. The small sample size due to limited time was a major limitation of the study.

Table II Comparison of mean age, blood pressure and waist circumference in various Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) categories
Variables IDRS, mean±SD P
High score (n=101) Medium score (n=32) Low score (n=3)
Age (yr) 54.85±14.49 41.06±12.12 36.00±7.93 <0.001
Systolic BP (mm Hg) 131.46±18.59 123.75±15.04 108.66±12.05 <0.05
Diastolic BP (mm Hg) 83.57±11.79 78.43±10.29 72.00±3.46 <0.05
Waist circumference male (cm) 95.21±10.49 81.82±10.42 78.50±10.60 <0.001
Waist circumference female (cm) 91.07±12.10 78.66±8.88 69.00±0.00 <0.001

SD, standard deviation; BP, blood pressure

In conclusion, nearly three-fourth (74.3%) of the study participants had a risk score of >60 by IDRS. Age, type of occupation, abdominal obesity, general obesity and high BP were the risk factors significantly associated with high risk score. Intensive information, education and communication efforts would be required at the community level for the prevention of diabetes.

Financial support & sponsorship: The first author (SN) acknowledges the Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, for providing Short Term Studentship (ICMR-STS No. 2017-00804).

Conflicts of Interest: None.

References

  1. . IDF diabetes atlas (9th ed). Brussels: IDF; .
  2. , , , . A study on distribution & determinants of Indian Diabetic Risk Score (IDRS) among rural population of West Bengal. Natl J Med Res. 2012;2:282-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , , . Prevalence and awareness regarding diabetes mellitus in rural Tamaka, Kolar. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries. 2010;30:18-21.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , . Poor adherence to treatment: A major challenge in diabetes. J Indian Acad Clinic Med. 2014;15:26-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , . Epidemiology of type 2 diabetes: Indian scenario. Indian J Med Res. 2007;125:217-30.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , . Application of Indian diabetic risk score in screening of an undiagnosed rural population of Kancheepuram district, Tamil Nadu - A cross sectional survey. MRIMS J Health Sci. 2014;2:81-3.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , . Expanding role of the Madras diabetes research foundation - Indian diabetes risk score in clinical practice. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2013;17:31-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . A simplified Indian diabetes risk score for screening for undiagnosed diabetic subjects. J Assoc Physicians India. 2005;53:759-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. . IDF diabetes atlas 2015
  10. , , . Diabetes risk in an Urban slum population in Bangalore India. Int J Prevent Public Health Sci. 2016;1:11-4.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , . Assessment of risk of type 2 diabetes using the Indian diabetes risk Score in an urban slum of Pune, Maharashtra, India: A cross-sectional study. WHO South East Asia J Public Health. 2016;5:53-61.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , , , , . High prevalence of diabetes, obesity and dyslipidaemia in urban slum population in Northern India. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001;25:1722-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , , , . Prevalence of diabetes in urban Haryana. AMJ. 2010;3:488-94.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , , . Prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes and assessments of their risk factors in urban slums of Bangalore. J Family Med Prim Care. 2015;4:399-404.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. , , . Indian Diabetic Risk Score (IDRS): A novel tool to assess the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Indian J Basic Appl Med Res. 2016;5:106-10.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , . An update on B G Prasad's socioeconomic scale. Int J Res Med Sci. 2016;4:4183-6.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections
Scroll to Top