Trends in Diabetes Management Among US Adults: 1999–2016
Updating national trends in diabetes management is important for identifying areas of progress and remaining gaps in diabetes care.
Evaluate trends in diabetes management.
Three nationally representative, serial cross-sectional surveys (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [n = 5800], National Health Interview Survey [n = 48,519], and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [n = 741,497]) were used to estimate trends in diabetes management from 1999 to 2016.
Non-pregnant US adults (aged ≥ 18 years) diagnosed with diabetes.
American Diabetes Association’s general recommendations for glycemic and cardiovascular risk factor control, medication usage, physical activity, preventive practices, and dietary intake.
From 1999 to 2016, the proportion of US adults with diabetes who attained glycemic control (HbA1c < 7.0%) followed a quadratic trend (49.6% in 1999–2004 to 58.6% in 2005–2010 to 55.8% in 2011–2016, P < 0.05 for trend). Control of blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg) and lipids (LDL cholesterol < 100 mg/dl) increased by 6.6 and 18.7 percentage points, respectively (P < 0.05 for trends). The proportion that attained glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control followed a quadratic trend (13.3% in 1999–2004 to 24.8% in 2005–2010 to 20.2% in 2011–2016, P < 0.05 for trend). Use of antidiabetic, antihypertensive, and statin medication among those who were eligible rose by 8.6, 5.0, and 24.0 percentage points, respectively (P < 0.05 for trends). Aerobic inactivity declined 7.1 percentage points, while adherence to aerobic activity (≥ 150 min/week) and resistance training (≥ 2 times/week) recommendations grew 3.4 and 3.2 percentage points, respectively (P < 0.05 for trends). Engagement in preventive practices (e.g., receipt of vaccinations) consistently increased for 6 out of 8 outcomes. However, the adherence to saturated fat (< 10% of total daily calories) and sodium (< 2300 mg/day) recommendations fell by 6.5 and 5.2 percentage points (P < 0.05 for trends).
Despite notable improvements, declines in glycemic control and adherence to dietary recommendations may be growing challenges in diabetes care.
KEY WORDSdiabetes mellitus risk factor control social disparities
The author thanks Dr. Elizabeth Selvin for sharing her NHANES dataset that contained calibrated values for HbA1c.
Dr. Fang was supported by NIH/NHLBI grant T32 HL007024.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The author declares that he does not have a conflict of interest.
- 7.American Diabetes Association. American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2016. 2016;34(Supp 1):S1-S112.Google Scholar
- 14.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Diabetes Report Card 2017. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2018.Google Scholar
- 17.Oza-Frank R, Cheng YJ, Narayan KV, Gregg EW. Trends in nutrient intake among adults with diabetes in the United States: 1988-2004. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2009;109(7):1173–1178.Google Scholar
- 18.Zipf G, Chiappa M, Porter KS, Ostchega Y, Lewis BG, Dostal J. Health and nutrition examination survey plan and operations, 1999-2010. Vital Health Stat. 2013;1(56):10–22.Google Scholar
- 19.Parsons VL, Moriarity CL, Jonas K, Moore TF, Davis KE, Tompkins L. Design and estimation for the national health interview survey, 2006-2015. Vital Health Stat. 2014;2(165):1–53.Google Scholar
- 20.Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Overview: BRFSS 2016. 2017; https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/2016/pdf/overview_2016.pdf. Accessed March 30, 2018.
- 21.Johnson CL, Paulose-Ram R, Ogden CL, et al. National health and nutrition examination survey. Analytic guidelines, 1999-2010. Vital Health Stat 2. 2013(161):1–24.Google Scholar
- 22.Ingram D, Malec D, Makuc D, et al. National Center for Health Statistics Guidelines for Analysis of Trends. Vital Health Stat. 2018;2(179):1–71.Google Scholar
- 41.Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, et al. Comparison of the Effects of Glucagon-Like Peptide Receptor Agonists and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for Prevention of Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials. Circulation. 2019;139(17):2022–2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar