Undiagnosed type 2 diabetes is common - intensified screening of established risk groups is imperative in Sweden: the SDPP cohort.

BACKGROUND: Undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a global problem. Current strategies for diagnosis in Sweden include screening individuals within primary healthcare who are of high risk, such as those with hypertension, obesity, prediabetes, family history of diabetes, or those who smoke daily. In this study, we aimed to estimate the proportion of individuals with undiagnosed T2D in Stockholm County and factors associated with T2D being diagnosed by healthcare. This information could improve strategies for detection. METHODS: We used data from the Stockholm Diabetes Prevention Programme (SDPP) cohort together with information from national and regional registers. Individuals without T2D aged 35-56 years at baseline were followed up after two ten-year periods. The proportion of diagnosed T2D was based on register information for 7664 individuals during period 1 and for 5148 during period 2. Undiagnosed T2D was assessed by oral glucose tolerance tests at the end of each period. With logistic regression, we analysed factors associated with being diagnosed among individuals with T2D. RESULTS: At the end of the first period, the proportion of individuals with T2D who had been diagnosed with T2D or not was similar (54.0% undiagnosed). At the end of the second period, the proportion of individuals with T2D was generally higher, but they were less likely to be undiagnosed (43.5%). The likelihood of being diagnosed was in adjusted analyses associated with overweight (OR=1.85; 95% CI 1.22-2.80), obesity (OR=2.73; 95% CI 1.76-4.23), higher fasting blood glucose (OR=2.11; 95% CI 1.67-2.66), and self-estimated poor general health (OR=2.42; 95% CI 1.07-5.45). Socioeconomic factors were not associated with being diagnosed among individuals with T2D. Most individuals (>71%) who developed T2D belonged to risk groups defined by having at least two of the prominent risk factors obesity, hypertension, daily smoking, prediabetes, or family history of T2D, including individuals with T2D who had not been diagnosed by healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of individuals who develop T2D during 10 years in Stockholm County are undiagnosed, emphasizing a need for intensified screening of T2D within primary healthcare. Screening can be targeted to individuals who have at least two prominent risk factors.

Hypertension in Pregnancy Among Immigrant and Swedish Women: A Cohort Study of All Pregnant Women in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in both first- and second-generation immigrant women in Europe and other Western countries; such knowledge may help elucidate the influence of genetic versus social factors on such risks. We aimed to study both first- and second-generation immigrant women for the presence of all types of hypertension (preexisting hypertension, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, and eclampsia) during pregnancy. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort study was conducted using data derived from the Swedish National Birth Register, the National Patient Register, and the Total Population Register. We used Cox regression analysis to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 99% CIs while adjusting for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities. The first-generation study included a total of 1 084 212 deliveries and 68 311 hypertension cases, and the second-generation study included 989 986 deliveries and 67 505 hypertension cases. The fully adjusted HR (with 99% CI) for hypertension in pregnancy among first-generation immigrant women was 0.69 (0.66-0.72), and among second-generation immigrant women, it was 0.88 (0.86-0.91), compared with Swedish-born women with 2 Swedish-born parents. Women born in Finland or with parent(s) from Finland had higher risks, with fully adjusted HRs (99% CIs) of 1.30 (1.18-1.43) and 1.12 (1.07-1.17), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both first- and second-generation immigrant women had overall lower risks of hypertension in pregnancy compared with other Swedish women. However, the risk reduction was less pronounced in second-generation compared with first-generation immigrant women, suggesting that environmental factors in Sweden may have an important influence on risk of hypertension during pregnancy.

Diabetes risk during pregnancy among second-generation immigrants: A national cohort study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gestational diabetes is more common in many first-generation immigrant women in Europe and other Western countries. Less is known about second-generation immigrant women; such knowledge is needed to understand generational influences on diabetes risk. We aimed to study second-generation immigrant women regarding the presence of all types of diabetes during pregnancy. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort study was conducted using the Swedish National Birth Register, the National Patient Register, and the Total Population Register. We used Cox regression analysis to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 99% confidence intervals (99% CI) for any diabetes during pregnancy and specific subtypes (gestational diabetes, pre-existing diabetes type 1, pre-existing diabetes type 2) in second-generation immigrant women compared with Swedish-born women with two Swedish-born parents while adjusting for sociodemographic factors, family history of diabetes, body mass index, smoking habits, and comorbidities. The study population included a total of 989,986 deliveries and 17,938 diabetes cases. The fully adjusted HR (with 99% CI) for any type of diabetes during pregnancy among second-generation immigrant women was 1.11 (1.05-1.18). Higher risks were found in women with parents from Africa, Asia, or Eastern Europe, as well as Denmark. A lower risk for pre-existing type 1 diabetes was found overall and for women with parents from most geographic regions. CONCLUSION: In this national cohort study, the risk of all types of diabetes during pregnancy was increased in second-generation immigrant women. Diabetes prevention and treatment is especially important in these women both before and during pregnancy.

IMplementation and evaluation of the school-based family support PRogram a Healthy School Start to promote child health and prevent OVErweight and obesity (IMPROVE) - study protocol for a cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: IMPROVE aims to conduct a hybrid type 3 evaluation design to test the effectiveness of bundled implementation strategies on intervention fidelity of the Healthy School Start (HSS) program, while simultaneously monitoring effects on health outcomes of children and parents. The HSS is a 4-component family support program for children starting school (5-7 years of age) promoting healthy dietary habits and physical activity in the home environment to prevent childhood obesity and parents' risk of developing type 2 diabetes. METHODS: IMPROVE is a cluster-randomized controlled trial with two arms to evaluate and compare the effects of two different bundles of implementation strategies on intervention fidelity expressed as adherence and responsiveness at 12 and 24 months (primary outcomes). Thirty schools in two municipalities will participate in the study reaching about 1400 families per school year. In stakeholder workshops, key implementation determinants were identified according to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Through a consensus process with stakeholders, two bundles of implementation strategies were tailored to address context-specific determinants. Schools randomly assigned to group 1 will receive bundle 1 (Basic) and group 2 will receive bundle 1 + 2 (Enhanced). Bundle 2 consists of external facilitation, fidelity monitoring and feedback strategies. Secondary outcomes will include change in acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and organisational readiness as perceived by school staff. In addition, child weight status and diet, and parents' feeding practices and risk of type 2 diabetes will be monitored. Linear and ordinal regression analysis will be used to test the effect on the primary and secondary outcomes, taking clustering and covariates into consideration where needed. Process evaluation will be conducted through key stakeholder interviews to investigate experiences of the program and perceptions on sustainability. DISCUSSION: This systematic approach to investigating the effectiveness of two different bundles of implementation strategies tailored to context-specific determinants on the fidelity of the HSS intervention will provide new insight into feasible implementation strategies and external support needed for the HSS to be effective and sustainable. Results will help inform how to bridge the gap between the research on school-based health programs and routine practice in schools. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04984421 , registered July 30, 2021.

Early detection of type 2 diabetes in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Stockholm - comparing reach of community and facility-based screening.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes and its high-risk stage, prediabetes, are often undiagnosed. Early detection of these conditions is of importance to avoid organ complications due to the metabolic disturbances associated with diabetes. Diabetes screening can detect persons unaware of diabetes risk and the elevated glucose levels can potentially be reversed through lifestyle modification and medication. There are mainly two approaches to diabetes screening: opportunistic facility-based screening at health facilities and community screening. OBJECTIVE: To determine the difference in population reach and participant characteristics between community- and facility-based screening for detection of type 2 diabetes and persons at high risk of developing diabetes. METHODS: Finnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) is a risk assessment tool used by two diabetes projects to conduct community- and facility-based screenings in disadvantaged suburbs of Stockholm. In this study, descriptive and limited inferential statistics were carried out analyzing data from 2,564 FINDRISC forms from four study areas. Community- and facility-based screening was compared in terms of participant characteristics and with population data from the respective areas to determine their reach. RESULTS: Our study found that persons born in Africa and Asia were reached through community screening to a higher extent than with facility-based screening, while persons born in Sweden and other European countries were reached more often by facility-based screening. Also, younger persons were reached more frequently through community screening compared with facility-based screening. Both types of screening reached more women than men. CONCLUSION: Community-based screening and facility-based screening were complementary methods in reaching different population groups at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Community screening in particular reached more hard-to-reach groups with unfavorable risk profiles, making it a critical strategy for T2D prevention. More men should be recruited to intervention studies and screening initiatives to achieve a gender balance.