Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2019
Plantar fasciitis in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: A contemporary cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Priesand Sari J, Schmidt Brian M, Ang Lynn, Wrobel James S, Munson Michael, Ye Wen, Pop-Busui Rodica
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Hyperglycemia leads to increase advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Subsequently, formation of AGEs can cause increased plantar fascial thickness (PFT), an imaging feature of plantar fasciitis (PF). This study evaluates the prevalence of PF in a contemporary cohort of type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients managed according to current standards, compared to patients without diabetes.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a five-year prevalence study in a large tertiary health system (approximately 535,000 patients/visits/year) with a single electronic medical record (EMR), applying a cohort discovery tool and database screen (Data Direct) with use of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. All patients with a PF diagnosis between 01/01/2011 and 01/01/2016 were included and divided into 3 groups: type 1 diabetes (7148 patients), type 2 diabetes (61,632 patients), and no diabetes (653,659 patients). Prevalence rates were calculated, accounting for other risk factors including BMI and gender using Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of PF in the entire study population was 0.85%. Prevalence rates were higher in patients with diabetes, particularly with type 2 diabetes (42% and 64% higher compared with patients with type 1 diabetes and no diabetes respectively). Individually, PF rates were 0.92% in type 1 diabetes and 1.31% in type 2 diabetes compared with 0.80% in patients with no diabetes (Type 1 vs. no diabetes p = 0.26; Type 2 vs. no diabetes p ≪ 0.0001; Type 1 vs. Type 2 diabetes p = 0.0054). Females in all groups had higher prevalence of PF than males (p ≪ 0.0001 for all), with those patients with diabetes having higher prevalence rates than those without diabetes. Patients with higher BMI levels (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) were also more likely to have PF in all categories except males with type 1 diabetes (p = 0.40).
CONCLUSIONS: In this large contemporary population managed in a tertiary health system, prevalence rates of PF were substantially higher in patients with diabetes compared with no diabetes, particularly in type 2 diabetes. Female gender and higher BMI were also associated with higher prevalence of PF in this cohort.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a five-year prevalence study in a large tertiary health system (approximately 535,000 patients/visits/year) with a single electronic medical record (EMR), applying a cohort discovery tool and database screen (Data Direct) with use of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. All patients with a PF diagnosis between 01/01/2011 and 01/01/2016 were included and divided into 3 groups: type 1 diabetes (7148 patients), type 2 diabetes (61,632 patients), and no diabetes (653,659 patients). Prevalence rates were calculated, accounting for other risk factors including BMI and gender using Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of PF in the entire study population was 0.85%. Prevalence rates were higher in patients with diabetes, particularly with type 2 diabetes (42% and 64% higher compared with patients with type 1 diabetes and no diabetes respectively). Individually, PF rates were 0.92% in type 1 diabetes and 1.31% in type 2 diabetes compared with 0.80% in patients with no diabetes (Type 1 vs. no diabetes p = 0.26; Type 2 vs. no diabetes p ≪ 0.0001; Type 1 vs. Type 2 diabetes p = 0.0054). Females in all groups had higher prevalence of PF than males (p ≪ 0.0001 for all), with those patients with diabetes having higher prevalence rates than those without diabetes. Patients with higher BMI levels (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) were also more likely to have PF in all categories except males with type 1 diabetes (p = 0.40).
CONCLUSIONS: In this large contemporary population managed in a tertiary health system, prevalence rates of PF were substantially higher in patients with diabetes compared with no diabetes, particularly in type 2 diabetes. Female gender and higher BMI were also associated with higher prevalence of PF in this cohort.