OBJECTIVE: We examined national trends in diabetes-related complications (heart failure [HF], myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, end-stage renal disease [ESRD], nontraumatic lower-extremity amputation [NLEA], and hyperglycemic crisis) among U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes during 2000-2020 by age-group, race and ethnicity, and sex. We also assessed trends in inequalities among those subgroups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Hospitalization rates for diabetes-related complications among adults (≥18 years) were estimated using the 2000-2020 National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample. The incidence of diabetes-related ESRD was estimated using the United States Renal Data System. The number of U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes was estimated from the National Health Interview Survey. Annual percent change (APC) was estimated for assessment of trends. RESULTS: After declines in the early 2000s, hospitalization rates increased for HF (2012-2020 APC 3.9%, P < 0.001), stroke (2009-2020 APC 2.8%, P < 0.001), and NLEA (2009-2020 APC 5.9%, P < 0.001), while ESRD incidence increased (2010-2020 APC 1.0%, P = 0.044). Hyperglycemic crisis increased from 2000 to 2020 (APC 2.2%, P < 0.001). MI hospitalizations declined during 2000-2008 (APC -6.0%, P < 0.001) and were flat thereafter. On average, age inequalities declined for hospitalizations for HF, MI, stroke, and ESRD incidence but increased for hyperglycemic crisis. Sex inequalities increased on average for hospitalizations for stroke and NLEA and for ESRD incidence. Racial and ethnic inequalities declined during 2012-2020 for ESRD incidence but increased for HF, stroke, and hyperglycemic crisis. CONCLUSIONS: There was a continued increase of several complications in the past decade. Age, sex, and racial and ethnic inequalities have worsened for some complications.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes may allow earlier detection, diagnosis, and treatment. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening every 3 years for abnormal blood glucose among adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity. Using IQVIA Ambulatory Electronic Medical Records, we estimated the proportion of adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity who received blood glucose testing within 3 years from baseline in 2016. METHODS: We identified 1,338,509 adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity in 2016 and without pre-existing diabetes. We included adults whose records were present in the data set for at least 2 years before their index body mass index (BMI) in 2016 and 3 years after the index BMI (2017-2019), during which we examined the occurrence of blood glucose testing. We calculated the unadjusted and adjusted prevalence of receiving blood glucose testing. RESULTS: The unadjusted prevalence of receiving blood glucose testing was 33.4% when it was defined as having a hemoglobin A(1c) or fasting plasma glucose measure. The unadjusted prevalence was 74.3% when we expanded the definition of testing to include random plasma glucose and unspecified glucose measures. Adults with obesity were more likely to receive the test than those with overweight. Men (vs women) and adults aged 50 to 59 years (vs other age groups) had higher testing rates. CONCLUSION: Our findings could inform clinical and public health promotion efforts to improve screening for blood glucose levels among adults with overweight or obesity.

The epidemic of diabetes continues to exert great burden and cost on affected people, their families, and society. Current estimates of the burden of prediabetes and diabetes in youth and adults for the U.S. are made available through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html and https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/diabetes/DiabetesAtlas.html) and for regions of the world by the International Diabetes Federation (https://diabetesatlas.org/2022-reports/). These data are typically updated every year or two. | | CDC’s estimates for the prevalence of both diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes, prevalence of prediabetes among adults, incidence of newly diagnosed diabetes, risk factors for diabetes-related complications, and burden of coexisting conditions and complications provide valuable information, but many questions are not addressed in these national data. Therefore, commencing with this month’s issue, Diabetes Care and CDC begin a partnership to enhance knowledge among the journal’s readership by highlighting important aspects of the national burden of diabetes that expand upon the data and information provided on the CDC’s website. Through this collaboration, we will at least twice a year publish in Diabetes Care in-depth explorations of timely and clinically significant topics authored by members of CDC. As with all original manuscripts submitted to Diabetes Care, they will undergo peer review to ensure they are scientifically rigorous and informative.

INTRODUCTION: The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for prediabetes and diabetes (dysglycemia) starting at age 35, or younger than 35 years among adults with overweight or obesity and other risk factors. Diabetes risk differs by sex, race, and ethnicity, but performance of the recommendation in these sociodemographic subgroups is unknown. METHODS: Nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2015-March 2020) were analyzed from 5,287 nonpregnant US adults without diagnosed diabetes. Screening eligibility was based on age, measured body mass index, and the presence of diabetes risk factors. Dysglycemia was defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100mg/dL (≥5.6 mmol/L) or haemoglobin A1c ≥5.7% (≥39mmol/mol). The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the ADA screening criteria were examined by sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: An estimated 83.1% (95% CI=81.2-84.7) of US adults were eligible for screening according to the 2023 ADA recommendation. Overall, ADA's screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity [95.0% (95% CI=92.7-96.6)] and low specificity [27.1% (95% CI=24.5-29.9)], which did not differ by race or ethnicity. Sensitivity was higher among women [97.8% (95% CI=96.6-98.6)] than men [92.4% (95% CI=88.3-95.1)]. Racial and ethnic differences in sensitivity and specificity among men were statistically significant (P=0.04 and P=0.02, respectively). Among women, guideline performance did not differ by race and ethnicity. DISCUSSION: The ADA screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity for all groups and was marginally higher in women than men. Racial and ethnic differences in guideline performance among men were small and unlikely to have a significant impact on health equity. Future research could examine adoption of this recommendation in practice and examine its effects on treatment and clinical outcomes by sex, race, and ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE: Preventive care services are important to prevent or delay complications associated with diabetes. We report trends in receipt of six American Diabetes Association-recommended preventive care services during 2008-2020. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used 2008-2020 data from the cross-sectional Medical Expenditures Panel Survey to calculate the proportion of U.S. adults ≥18 years of age with diagnosed diabetes who reported receiving preventive care services, overall and by subpopulation (n = 25,616). We used joinpoint regression to identify trends during 2008-2019. The six services completed in the past year included at least one dental examination, dilated-eye examination, foot examination, and cholesterol test; at least two A1C tests, and an influenza vaccine. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2020, proportions of U.S. adults with diabetes receiving any individual preventive care service ranged from 32.6% to 89.9%. From 2008 to 2019, overall trends in preventive services among these adults were flat except for an increase in influenza vaccination (average annual percent change: 2.6% [95% CI 1.1%, 4.2%]). Trend analysis of subgroups was heterogeneous: influenza vaccination and A1C testing showed improvements among several subgroups, whereas cholesterol testing (patients aged 45-64 years; less than a high school education; Medicaid insurance) and dental visits (uninsured) declined. In 2020, 8.2% (95% CI 4.5%, 11.9%) of those with diabetes received none of the recommended preventive care services. CONCLUSIONS: Other than influenza vaccination, we observed no improvement in preventive care service use among U.S. adults with diabetes. These data highlight services and specific subgroups that could be targeted to improve preventive care among adults with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: In 2019 among US adults, 1 in 9 had diagnosed diabetes and 1 in 5 had diagnosed depression. Since these conditions frequently coexist, compounding their health and economic burden, we examined state-specific trends in depression prevalence among US adults with and without diagnosed diabetes. METHODS: We used data from the 2011 through 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to evaluate self-reported diabetes and depression prevalence. Joinpoint regression estimated state-level trends in depression prevalence by diabetes status. RESULTS: In 2019, the overall prevalence of depression in US adults with and without diabetes was 29.2% (95% CI, 27.8%-30.6%) and 17.9% (95% CI, 17.6%-18.1%), respectively. From 2011 to 2019, the depression prevalence was relatively stable for adults with diabetes (28.6% versus 29.2%) but increased for those without diabetes from 15.5% to 17.9% (average annual percent change [APC] over the 9-year period = 1.6%, P = .015). The prevalence of depression was consistently more than 10 percentage points higher among adults with diabetes than those without diabetes. The APC showed a significant increase in some states (Illinois: 5.9%, Kansas: 3.5%) and a significant decrease in others (Arizona: -5.1%, Florida: -4.0%, Colorado: -3.4%, Washington: -0.9%). In 2019, although it varied by state, the depression prevalence among adults with diabetes was highest in states with a higher diabetes burden such as Kentucky (47.9%), West Virginia (47.0%), and Maine (41.5%). CONCLUSION: US adults with diabetes are more likely to report prevalent depression compared with adults without diabetes. These findings highlight the importance of screening and monitoring for depression as a potential complication among adults with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined national trends in age, sex, racial and ethnic, and socioeconomic inequalities for diagnosed diabetes prevalence and incidence among US adults from 2008-2021. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) were from the National Health Interview Survey (2008-2021). The annual between-group variance (BGV) for sex, race, and ethnicity, and the slope index of inequality (SII) for age, education, and poverty-to-income ratio (PIR) along with the average annual percent change (AAPC) were estimated in 2023 to assess trends in inequalities over time in diabetes prevalence and incidence. For BGV and SII, a value of 0 represents no inequality while a value further from 0 represents greater inequality. RESULTS: On average over time, PIR inequalities in diabetes prevalence worsened (SII: -8.24 in 2008 and -9.80 in 2021; AAPC for SII: -1.90%, p=0.003) while inequalities in incidence for age (SII: 17.60 in 2008 and 8.85 in 2021; AAPC for SII: -6.47%, p<0.001), sex (BGV: 0.09 in 2008, 2.05 in 2009, 1.24 in 2010, and 0.27 in 2021; AAPC for BGV: -12.34%, p=0.002), racial and ethnic (BGV: 4.80 in 2008 and 2.17 in 2021; AAPC for BGV: -10.59%, p=0.010), and education (SII: -9.89 in 2008 and -2.20 in 2021; AAPC for SII: 8.27%, p=0.001) groups improved. CONCLUSIONS: From 2008-2021, age, sex, racial and ethnic, and education inequalities in the incidence of diagnosed diabetes improved but persisted. Income-related diabetes prevalence inequalities worsened over time. To close these gaps, future research could focus on identifying factors driving these trends including the contribution of morbidity and mortality.

INTRODUCTION: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prediabetes and diabetes screening for asymptomatic adults aged 35-70 years with overweight/obesity, lowering the age from 40 years in its 2015 recommendation. The USPSTF suggested considering earlier screening in racial and ethnic groups with high diabetes risk at younger ages or lower BMI. This study examined the clinical performance of these USPSTF screening recommendations as well as alternative age and BMI cutoffs in the U.S. adult population overall, and separately by race and ethnicity. METHODS: Nationally representative data were collected from 3,243 nonpregnant adults without diagnosed diabetes in January 2017-March 2020 and analyzed from 2021 to 2022. Screening eligibility was based on age and measured BMI. Collectively, prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes were defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100 mg/dL or hemoglobin A(1c) ≥5.7%. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of alternate screening criteria were examined overall, and by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: The 2021 criteria exhibited marginally higher sensitivity (58.6%, 95% CI=55.5, 61.6 vs 52.9%, 95% CI=49.7, 56.0) and lower specificity (69.3%, 95% CI=65.7, 72.2 vs 76.4%, 95% CI=73.3, 79.2) than the 2015 criteria overall, and within each racial and ethnic group. Screening at lower age and BMI thresholds resulted in even greater sensitivity and lower specificity, especially among Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and Asian adults. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years regardless of BMI yielded the most equitable performance across all racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 2021 USPSTF screening criteria will identify more adults with prediabetes and diabetes in all racial and ethnic groups than the 2015 criteria. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years exhibited even higher sensitivity and performed most similarly by race and ethnicity, which may further improve early detection of prediabetes and diabetes in diverse populations.

This article describes a significant decline in emergency department visits for acute life-threatening conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that patients may be delaying or avoiding care or unable to access care during the pandemic.

AIMS: Recent USPSTF and ADA guidelines expanded criteria of whom to test to identify prediabetes and diabetes. We described which Americans are eligible and report receiving glucose testing by USPSTF 2015 and 2021 as well as ADA 2003 and 2022 recommendations, and performance of each guideline. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional data from 6,007 non-pregnant U.S. adults without diagnosed diabetes in the 2013-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. We reported proportions of adults who met each guideline's criteria for glucose testing and reported receiving glucose testing in the past three years, overall and by key population subgroups,. Defining prediabetes (FPG 100-125mg/dL and/or HbA1c 5.7-6.4%) or previously undiagnosed diabetes (FPG≥126mg/dL and/or HbA1c≥6.5%), we assessed sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: During 2013-2018, 76.7 million, 90.4 million, 157.7 million, and 169.5 million US adults met eligibility for glucose testing by USPSTF 2015, 2021, and ADA 2003 and 2022 guidelines, respectively. On average, 52% of adults reported receiving glucose testing within the past 3 years. Likelihood of receiving glucose testing was lower among younger adults, men, Hispanic adults, those with less than high school completion, those living in poverty, and those without health insurance or a usual place of care than their respective counterparts. ADA recommendations were most sensitive (range: 91.0% to 100.0%) and least specific (range: 18.3% to 35.3%); USPSTF recommendations exhibited lower sensitivity (51.9% to 66.6%), but higher specificity (56.6% to 74.5%). CONCLUSIONS: An additional 12-14 million US adults are eligible for diabetes screening. USPSTF 2021 criteria provide balanced sensitivity and specificity while ADA 2022 criteria maximize sensitivity. Glucose testing does not align with guidelines and disparities remain.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of diabetes comorbidities by baseline healthcare utilization on receipt of recommended eye examinations. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 310691 nonelderly adults with type 2 diabetes in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database from 2016 to 2019. Patients were grouped based on diabetes-concordant (related) or -discordant (unrelated) comorbidities. Logistic regression was used to estimate the prevalence ratio (PR) for eye examinations by comorbidity status, healthcare utilization, and an interaction between comorbidities and utilization, controlling for age, sex, region, and major eye disease. RESULTS: Prevalence of biennial eye examinations varied by the four comorbidity groups: 43.5% (diabetes only), 52.7% (concordant+discordant comorbidities), 48.0% (concordant comorbidities only), and 45.3% (discordant comorbidities only). In the lowest healthcare utilization tertile, the concordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had lower prevalence of examinations compared to diabetes only (PR 0.95 [95% CI 0.92-0.98] and PR 0.91 [95% CI 0.88-0.95], respectively). In the medium utilization tertile, the discordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had lower prevalence of examinations (PR 0.89 [0.83-0.95] and PR 0.94 [0.90-0.98], respectively). In the highest utilization tertile, the concordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had higher prevalence of examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with low healthcare utilization, having comorbid conditions is associated with lower prevalence of eye examinations. Among those with medium healthcare utilization, patients with diabetes-discordant comorbidities are particularly vulnerable. This study highlights populations of diabetes patients who would benefit from increased assistance in receiving vision-preserving eye examinations.

AIMS: To report the national proportions and trends of adult hospitalizations with diabetes in the United States during 2000-2018. METHODS: We used the 2000-2018 National Inpatient Sample to identify hospital discharges with any listed and primary diagnoses for diabetes, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and ICD-10-CM codes. We calculated proportions and trends of adult hospitalizations with diabetes, overall and by subpopulations. We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database to assess calendar-year and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2018, the proportion of hospitalizations among adults ≥18 years increased from 17.1% to 27.3% (average annual percentage change [AAPC] 2.5%; P < 0.001) for any listed diabetes codes and from 1.5% to 2.1% (AAPC 2.2%; P < 0.001) for primary diagnosis of diabetes. Men, non-Hispanic Black patients, and those from poorer zip codes had higher proportions of hospitalizations with diabetes codes. CONCLUSION: In recent years, approximately one-quarter of adult hospitalizations in the United States had a listed diabetes code, increasing about 2.5% per year from 2000 to 2018. These data are important for benchmarking purposes, especially due to disruptions in health care utilization from the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Heart failure (HF) is a major contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes. In this study, we estimated trends in the incidence of HF inpatient admissions and emergency department (ED) visits by diabetes status. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Population-based age-standardized HF rates in adults with and without diabetes were estimated from the 2006-2017 National Inpatient Sample, Nationwide ED Sample and year-matched National Health Interview Survey, and stratified by age and sex. Trends were assessed using Joinpoint. RESULTS: HF inpatient admissions did not change in adults with diabetes between 2006 and 2013 (from 53.9 to 50.4 per 1000 persons; annual percent change (APC): -0.3 (95% CI -2.5 to 1.9) but increased from 50.4 to 62.3 between 2013 and 2017 (APC: 4.8 (95% CI 0.3 to 9.6)). In adults without diabetes, inpatient admissions initially declined (from 14.8 in 2006 to 12.9 in 2014; APC -2.3 (95% CI -3.2 to -1.2)) and then plateaued. Patterns were similar in men and women, but relative increases were greatest in young adults with diabetes. HF-related ED visits increased overall, in men and women, and in all age groups, but increases were greater in adults with (vs without) diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Causes of increased HF rates in hospital settings are unknown, and more detailed data are needed to investigate the aetiology and determine prevention strategies, particularly among adults with diabetes and especially young adults with diabetes.

More than 30 million people in the U.S. have diabetes, and approximately 7.4 million (30% of those with diabetes) regularly use one or more insulin formulations. For those who rely on it, i.e., all patients with type 1 diabetes and many patients with type 2 diabetes, insulin is a lifesaving medication. Between 2007 and 2016, the average annual total Medicare Part D payment on insulin per person increased by 358%, which resulted in an 81% increase for the out-of-pocket (OOP) payment (1). The consequences of unaffordability for insulin can be severe and costly. High OOP payments may force individuals to choose between purchasing their medication and paying for other necessities. To date, there are limited data on how total insulin payment and the corresponding OOP payment changed in the commercially insured population within the same period. The objective of this study is to delineate total and patients’ OOP payment trends for insulin among privately insured U.S. adults.

Estimates based on the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) showed that diabetes-related nontraumatic lower- extremity amputation (NLEA) rates declined among hospitalized patients between 2000 and 2009, followed by an increasing NLEA rate between 2009 and 2015 (1). The increase was largely observed in young and middle-aged adults (1). However, the NIS dataset includes only inpatient admissions; minor amputation surgeries that were performed in ambulatory settings were not included in these estimates. In addition, NIS data are event-based, and multiple amputations in the same person are considered as a new event each time. In the current study, we used the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database to examine NLEA occurring in inpatient and outpatient settings among privately insured adults 18–64 years of age with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate trends in total payment and patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) payments of noninsulin glucose-lowering drugs by class from 2005 to 2018. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed data for 53 million prescriptions from adults aged >18 years with type 2 diabetes under fee-for-service plans from the 2005-2018 IBM MarketScan Commercial Databases. The total payment was measured as the amount that the pharmacy received, and the OOP payment was the sum of copay, coinsurance, and deductible paid by the beneficiaries. We applied a joinpoint regression to evaluate nonlinear trends in cost between 2005 and 2018. We further conducted a decomposition analysis to explore the drivers for total payment change. RESULTS: Total annual payments for older drug classes, including metformin, sulfonylurea, meglitinide, α-glucosidase inhibitors, and thiazolidinedione, have declined during 2005-2018, ranging from -$271 (-53.8%) (USD) for metformin to -$2,406 (-92.2%) for thiazolidinedione. OOP payments for these drug classes also reduced. In the same period, the total annual payments for the newer drug classes, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, have increased by $2,181 (88.4%), $3,721 (77.6%), and $1,374 (37.0%), respectively. OOP payment for these newer classes remained relatively unchanged. Our study findings indicate that switching toward the newer classes for noninsulin glucose-lowering drugs was the main driver that explained the total payment increase. CONCLUSIONS: Average annual payments and OOP payment for noninsulin glucose-lowering drugs have increased significantly from 2005 to 2018. The uptake of newer drug classes was the main driver.

OBJECTIVES: Surveys for U.S. diabetes surveillance do not reliably distinguish between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, potentially obscuring trends in type 1 among adults. To validate survey-based algorithms for distinguishing diabetes type, we linked survey data collected from adult patients with diabetes to a gold standard diabetes type. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We collected data through a telephone survey of 771 adults with diabetes receiving care in a large healthcare system in North Carolina. We tested 34 survey classification algorithms utilizing information on respondents' report of physician-diagnosed diabetes type, age at onset, diabetes drug use, and body mass index. Algorithms were evaluated by calculating type 1 and type 2 sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) relative to a gold standard diagnosis of diabetes type determined through analysis of EHR data and endocrinologist review of selected cases. RESULTS: Algorithms based on self-reported type outperformed those based solely on other data elements. The top-performing algorithm classified as type 1 all respondents who reported type 1 and were prescribed insulin, as "other diabetes type" all respondents who reported "other," and as type 2 the remaining respondents (type 1 sensitivity 91.6%, type 1 specificity 98.9%, type 1 PPV 82.5%, type 1 NPV 99.5%). This algorithm performed well in most demographic subpopulations. CONCLUSIONS: The major federal health surveys should consider including self-reported diabetes type if they do not already, as the gains in the accuracy of typing are substantial compared to classifications based on other data elements. This study provides much-needed guidance on the accuracy of survey-based diabetes typing algorithms.

On March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national emergency in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Subsequently, states enacted stay-at-home orders to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and reduce the burden on the U.S. health care system. CDC* and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)(dagger) recommended that health care systems prioritize urgent visits and delay elective care to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in health care settings. By May 2020, national syndromic surveillance data found that emergency department (ED) visits had declined 42% during the early months of the pandemic (1). This report describes trends in ED visits for three acute life-threatening health conditions (myocardial infarction [MI, also known as heart attack], stroke, and hyperglycemic crisis), immediately before and after declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic as a national emergency. These conditions represent acute events that always necessitate immediate emergency care, even during a public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 10 weeks following the emergency declaration (March 15-May 23, 2020), ED visits declined 23% for MI, 20% for stroke, and 10% for hyperglycemic crisis, compared with the preceding 10-week period (January 5-March 14, 2020). EDs play a critical role in diagnosing and treating life-threatening conditions that might result in serious disability or death. Persons experiencing signs or symptoms of serious illness, such as severe chest pain, sudden or partial loss of motor function, altered mental state, signs of extreme hyperglycemia, or other life-threatening issues, should seek immediate emergency care, regardless of the pandemic. Clear, frequent, highly visible communication from public health and health care professionals is needed to reinforce the importance of timely care for medical emergencies and to assure the public that EDs are implementing infection prevention and control guidelines that help ensure the safety of their patients and health care personnel.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to examine recent trends in diagnosed diabetes prevalence for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) adults aged 18 years and older in the Indian Health Service (IHS) active clinical population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the IHS National Data Warehouse for AI/AN adults for each fiscal year from 2006 (n=729 470) through 2017 (n=1 034 814). The prevalence of diagnosed diabetes for each year and the annual percentage change were estimated for adults overall, as well as by sex, age group, and geographic region. RESULTS: After increasing significantly from 2006 to 2013, diabetes prevalence for AI/AN adults in the IHS active clinical population decreased significantly from 2013 to 2017. Prevalence was 14.4% (95% CI 13.9% to 15.0%) in 2006; 15.4% (95% CI 14.8% to 16.0%) in 2013; and 14.6% (95% CI 14.1% to 15.2%) in 2017. Trends for men and women were similar to the overall population, as were those for all age groups. For all geographic regions, prevalence either decreased significantly or leveled off in recent years. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes prevalence in AI/AN adults in the IHS active clinical population has decreased significantly since 2013. While these results cannot be generalized to all AI/AN adults in the USA, this study documents the first known decrease in diabetes prevalence for AI/AN people.

OBJECTIVE: To report U.S. national population-based rates and trends in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state (HHS) among adults, in both the emergency department (ED) and inpatient setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed data from 1 January 2006 through 30 September 2015 from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample and National Inpatient Sample to characterize ED visits and inpatient admissions with DKA and HHS. We used corresponding year cross-sectional survey data from the National Health Interview Survey to estimate the number of adults >/=18 years with diagnosed diabetes to calculate population-based rates for DKA and HHS in both ED and inpatient settings. Linear trends from 2009 to 2015 were assessed using Joinpoint software. RESULTS: In 2014, there were a total of 184,255 and 27,532 events for DKA and HHS, respectively. The majority of DKA events occurred in young adults aged 18-44 years (61.7%) and in adults with type 1 diabetes (70.6%), while HHS events were more prominent in middle-aged adults 45-64 years (47.5%) and in adults with type 2 diabetes (88.1%). Approximately 40% of the hyperglycemic events were in lower-income populations. Overall, event rates for DKA significantly increased from 2009 to 2015 in both ED (annual percentage change [APC] 13.5%) and inpatient settings (APC 8.3%). A similar trend was seen for HHS (APC 16.5% in ED and 6.3% in inpatient). The increase was in all age groups and in both men and women. CONCLUSIONS: Causes of increased rates of hyperglycemic events are unknown. More detailed data are needed to investigate the etiology and determine prevention strategies.

Approximately 30 million persons in the United States have diabetes. Persons with diabetes are at risk for vision loss from diabetic retinopathy and other eye diseases (1). Diabetic retinopathy, the most common diabetes-related eye disease, affects 29% of U.S. adults aged >/=40 years with diabetes (2) and is the leading cause of incident blindness among working-age adults (1). It is caused by chronically high blood glucose damaging blood vessels in the retina. Annual dilated eye exams are recommended for persons with diabetes because early detection and timely treatment of diabetic eye diseases can prevent irreversible vision loss. Studies have documented prevalence of annual eye exams among U.S. adults with diabetes; however, a lack of recent state-level data limits identification of geographic disparities in adherence to this recommendation. Medicare claims from the 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) were examined to assess the prevalence of eye exams in 2017 among beneficiaries with diabetes who were continuously enrolled in Part B fee-for-service insurance, which covers annual eye exams for beneficiaries with diabetes. This report also examines disparities, by state and race/ethnicity, in receipt of eye exams. Nationally, 54.1% of beneficiaries with diabetes had an eye exam in 2017. Prevalence ranged from 43.9% in Puerto Rico to 64.8% in Rhode Island. Fewer than 50% of beneficiaries received an eye exam in seven states (Alabama, Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nevada, West Virginia, and Wyoming) and Puerto Rico. Non-Hispanic white (white) beneficiaries had a higher prevalence of receiving an eye exam (55.6%) than did non-Hispanic blacks (blacks) (48.9%) and Hispanics (48.2%). Barriers to receiving eye care (e.g., suboptimal clinical care coordination and referral, low health literacy, and lack of perceived need for care) might limit Medicare beneficiaries' ability to follow this preventive care recommendation. Understanding and addressing these barriers might prevent irreversible vision loss among persons with diabetes.

Diabetes affects approximately 12% of the U.S. adult population and approximately 25% of adults aged >/=65 years. From 2009 to 2017, there was no significant change in diabetes prevalence overall or among persons aged 65-79 years (1). However, these estimates were based on survey data with <5,000 older adults. Medicare administrative data sets, which contain claims for millions of older adults, afford an opportunity to explore both trends over time and heterogeneity within an older population. Previous studies have shown that claims data can be used to identify persons with diagnosed diabetes (2). This study estimated annual prevalence and incidence of diabetes during 2001-2015 using Medicare claims data for beneficiaries aged >/=68 years and found that prevalence plateaued after 2012 and incidence decreased after 2006. In 2015 (the most recent year estimated) prevalence was 31.6%, and incidence was 3.0%. Medicare claims can serve as an important source of data for diabetes surveillance for the older population, which can inform prevention and treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Vascular complications of diabetes have declined substantially over the past 20 years. However, the impact of modern medical treatments on infectious diseases in people with diabetes remains unknown. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We estimated rates of infections requiring hospitalizations in adults (>/=18 years) with versus without diabetes, using the 2000-2015 National Inpatient Sample and the National Health Interview Surveys. Annual age-standardized and age-specific hospitalization rates in groups with and without diabetes were stratified by infection type. Trends were assessed using Joinpoint regression with the annual percentage change (Delta%/year) reported. RESULTS: In 2015, hospitalization rates remained almost four times as high in adults with versus without diabetes (rate ratio 3.8 [95% CI 3.8-3.8]) and as much as 15.7 times as high, depending on infection type. Overall, between 2000 and 2015, rates of hospitalizations increased from 63.1 to 68.7 per 1,000 persons in adults with diabetes and from 15.5 to 16.3 in adults without diabetes. However, from 2008, rates declined 7.9% in adults without diabetes (from 17.7 to 16.3 per 1,000 persons; Delta%/year -1.5, P < 0.01), while no significant decline was noted in adults with diabetes. The lack of decline in adults with diabetes in the later period was driven by significant increases in rates of foot infections and cellulitis as well as by lack of decline for pneumonia and postoperative wound infections in young adults with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study highlight the need for greater infectious risk mitigation in adults with diabetes, especially young adults with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The use of emergency medical services (EMS) for diabetes-related events is believed to be substantial but has not been quantified nationally despite the diverse acute complications associated with diabetes. We describe diabetes-related EMS activations in 2015 among people of all ages from 23 U.S. states. METHODS: We used data from 23 states that reported >/=95% of their EMS activations to the U.S. National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) in 2015. A diabetes-related EMS activation was defined using coded EMS provider impressions of "diabetes symptoms" and coded complaints recorded by dispatch of "diabetic problem." We described activations by type of location, urbanicity, U.S. Census Division, season, and time of day; and patient-events by age category, race/ethnicity, disposition, and treatment with glucose. Crude and age-adjusted diabetes-related EMS patient-level event rates were calculated for adults >/=18 years of age with diagnosed diabetes using the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to estimate the population denominator. RESULTS: Of 10,324,031 relevant EMS records, 241,495 (2.3%) were diabetes-related activations, which involved over 235,000 hours of service. Most activations occurred in urban or suburban environ- ments (86.4%), in the home setting (73.5%), and were slightly more frequent in the summer months. Most patients (72.6%) were >/=45 years of age and over one-half (55.4%) were transported to the emergency department. The overall age-adjusted diabetes-related EMS event rate was 33.9 per 1,000 persons with diagnosed diabetes; rates were highest in patients 18-44 years of age, males, and non-Hispanic blacks and varied by U.S. Census Division. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes results in a substantial burden on EMS resources. Collection of more detailed diabetes complication information in NEMSIS may help facilitate EMS resource planning and prevention strategies.

Objective: To determine whether diabetes prevalence and incidence has remained flat or changed direction during the past 5 years. Research design and methods: We calculated annual prevalence and incidence of diagnosed diabetes (type 1 and type 2 combined) for civilian, non-institutionalized adults aged 18-79 years using annual, nationally representative cross-sectional survey data from the National Health Interview Survey from 1980 to 2017. Trends in rates by age group, sex, race/ethnicity, and education were calculated using annual percentage change (APC). Results: Overall, the prevalence of age-adjusted, diagnosed diabetes did not change significantly from 1980 to 1990, but increased significantly (APC 4.4%) from 1990 to 2009 to a peak of 8.2 per 100 adults (95% CI 7.8 to 8.6), and then plateaued through 2017. The incidence of age-adjusted, diagnosed diabetes did not change significantly from 1980 to 1990, but increased significantly (APC 4.8%) from 1990 to 2007 to 7.8 per 1000 adults (95% CI 6.7 to 9.0), and then decreased significantly (APC -3.1%) to 6.0 (95% CI 4.9 to 7.3) in 2017. The decrease in incidence appears to be driven by non-Hispanic whites with an APC of -5.1% (p=0.002) after 2008. Conclusions: After an almost 20-year increase in the national prevalence and incidence of diagnosed diabetes, an 8-year period of stable prevalence and a decrease in incidence has occurred. Causes of the plateauing and decrease are unclear but the overall burden of diabetes remains high and deserves continued monitoring and intervention.

Background: We describe the epidemiology and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of culture-confirmed Shigella infections in facility-based surveillance sites in Guatemala. Current studies using quantitative molecular diagnostics suggest Shigella may contribute most to the global diarrheal disease burden. Since identification of Shigella requires culturing techniques using stool specimens and few laboratories in Guatemala routinely culture for this pathogen, little is known about the true burden of Shigella in Guatemala or, importantly, the antimicrobial resistance patterns. Methods: Clinical, epidemiological, and laboratory data were collected on 5399 patients with acute diarrhea (≥3 loose stools in 24 h) from June 2007-August 2012. Multidrug resistance (MDR) was defined as resistance to ampicillin and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Results: Five percent (261) of stool specimens yielded Shigella spp. The annual incidence of laboratory-confirmed infections ranged from 5.0 to 24.1 per 100,000 persons in Santa Rosa and 0.3 to 6.2 per 100,000 in Quetzaltenango; 58% of cases occurred in children < 5 years of age. Thirty patients were hospitalized; one patient died. Oral rehydration or intravenous solution was used to treat 72% of hospitalized and 15% of ambulatory cases. Fifty-nine percent of cases were S. flexneri and 51% of cases were MDR. Conclusions: Shigella is an important cause of bacterial diarrhea in children and prevalence of MDR highlights the importance of appropriate treatment regimens. This study demonstrates that strengthening laboratory capacity in Guatemala can help determine causes which can lead to prevention of diarrheal diseases, particularly in children. Such capacity building is also critical for rapid detection and control of public health threats at their source and therefore for global health security.

Importance: Coordinated efforts by national organizations in the United States to implement evidence-based lifestyle modification programs are under way to reduce type 2 diabetes (hereinafter referred to as diabetes) and cardiovascular risks. Objective: To provide a status report on the reach and use of diabetes prevention services nationally. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative, population-based cross-sectional analysis of 2016 and 2017 National Health Interview Survey data was conducted from August 3, 2017, through November 15, 2018. Nonpregnant, noninstitutionalized, civilian respondents 18 years or older at high risk for diabetes, defined as those with no self-reported diabetes diagnosis but with diagnosed prediabetes or an elevated American Diabetes Association (ADA) risk score (>5), were included in the analysis. Analyses were conducted for adults with (and in sensitivity analyses, for those without) elevated body mass index. Main Outcomes and Measures: Absolute numbers and proportions of adults at high risk with elevated body mass index receiving advice about diet, physical activity guidance, referral to weight loss programs, referral to diabetes prevention programs, or any of these, and those affirming engagement in each (or any) activity in the past year were estimated. To identify where gaps exist, a prevention continuum diagram plotted existing vs desired goal achievement. Variation in risk-reducing activities by age, sex, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, insurance status, history of gestational diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or body mass index was also examined. Results: This analysis included 50912 respondents (representing 223.0 million adults nationally) 18 years or older (mean [SE] age, 46.1 [0.2] years; 48.1% [0.3%] male) with complete data and no self-reported diabetes diagnosis by their health care professional. Of the represented population, 36.0% (80.0 million) had either a physician diagnosis of prediabetes (17.9 million), an elevated ADA risk score (73.3 million), or both (11.3 million). Among those with diagnosed prediabetes, 73.5% (95% CI, 71.6%-75.3%) reported receiving advice and/or referrals for diabetes risk reduction from their health care professional, and, of those, 35.0% (95% CI, 30.5%-39.8%) to 75.8% (95% CI, 73.2%-78.3%) reported engaging in the respective activity or program in the past year. Half of adults with elevated ADA risk scores but no diagnosed prediabetes (50.6%; 95% CI, 49.5%-51.8%) reported receiving risk-reduction advice and/or referral, of whom 33.5% (95% CI, 30.1%-37.0%) to 75.2% (95% CI, 73.4%-76.9%) reported engaging in activities and/or programs. Participation in diabetes prevention programs was exceedingly low. Advice from a health care professional, age range from 45 to 64 years, higher educational attainment, health insurance status, gestational diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and obesity were associated with higher engagement in risk-reducing activities and/or programs. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults at high risk for diabetes, major gaps in receiving advice and/or referrals and engaging in diabetes risk-reduction activities and/or programs were noted. These results suggest that risk perception, health care professional referral and communication, and insurance coverage may be key levers to increase risk-reducing behaviors in US adults. These findings provide a benchmark from which to monitor future program availability and coverage, identification of prediabetes, and referral to and retention in programs.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of blindness among working-age adults, and although screening with eye exams is effective, screening rates are low. We evaluated eye exam visits over a 5-year period in a large population of insured patients 10-64 years of age with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used claims data from IBM Watson Health to identify patients with diabetes and continuous insurance coverage from 2010 to 2014. Diabetes and DR were defined using ICD-9 Clinical Modification codes. We calculated eye exam visit frequency by diabetes type over a 5-year period and estimated period prevalence and cumulative incidence of DR among those receiving an eye exam. RESULTS: Among the 298,383 insured patients with type 2 and no diagnosed DR, almost half had no eye exam visits over the 5-year period and only 15.3% met the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommendations for annual or biennial eye exams. For the 2,949 patients with type 1 diabetes, one-third had no eye exam visits and 26.3% met ADA recommendations. The 5-year period prevalence and cumulative incidence of DR was 24.4% and 15.8% for patients with type 2 diabetes, respectively, and 54.0% and 33.4% for patients with type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of eye exams was alarmingly low, adding to the abundant literature that systemic changes in health care may be needed to detect and prevent vision-threatening eye disease among people with diabetes.

The improved long-term outlook for adults after receiving a diagnosis of diabetes is one of the most important clinical and public health successes in recent decades. During the early 1990s, patients with diabetes had reductions in lifespan of 7 to 10 years and an increased risk of lower-extremity amputation (LEA) vs those without diabetes (58 vs 3 cases/10 000 persons/year, respectively) and kidney failure (28 vs 2 cases/10 000 persons/year).1 Risk of cardiovascular events, which caused the most deaths, also was higher among persons with diabetes vs those without diabetes (141 vs 38 hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction [AMI] per 10 000 persons/year).1 But through multifaceted improvements in diabetes care, risk factor management, self-management education and support, and better integration of care, these risk differences were reduced by 28% to 68% across a range of complications between 1990 and 2010, with gains most notable for reductions in AMI, stroke, and death due to hyperglycemia.1,2 Although the excess morbidity risk remained too high and the reduction in cardiovascular disease mortality led to new types of complications and causes of death,3 a continued reduction in the overall public health burden caused by diabetes seemed promising.