Does glucagon stimulation test help to predict autoimmunity in newly diagnosed non obese adults with diabetes?

Classification of diabetes type in adults patients remains difficult. This study was undertaken to determine the relationship between presence of autoantibodies in the serum and the result of glucagon stimulation test in non obese patients at aged above 35 years with newly diagnosed diabetes.Study involved 52 non obese adults aged 42 years [interquartile range (IQR): 37-46], with body mass index (BMI) 23.7 kg/m2 (IQR: 21.4-26.2). Presence of autoantibodies to islet cells (ICA), antibodies to tyrosine phosphatase (IA-2), glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibodies (anti-GAD) and plasma fasting and stimulating (6 min after intravenous injection of 1 mg glucagon) C-peptide level was assessed.73.1% subjects had at least 1 of 3 assessed autoantibodies, 26.9% patients were autoantibodies negative. According to serum C-peptide concentration after stimulation test with glucagon patients were divided into 2 groups. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve for determination of an optimal cut-point (C-peptide stimulation above and below 1.6) was used. In patients with negative stimulation test higher prevalence of 2 (33.3% vs. 66.7%; p=0.04) or 3 (12.5% vs. 87.5%, p=0.01) positive autoantibodies was noticed in comparison to patients with positive stimulation test. Multivariate logistic regression showed that presence of autoantibodies was independently associated with stimulated C-peptide level (OR 2.3; 95%CI: 1.07-5.28, p=0.03).Autoimmune diabetes should be suspected in subjects with lower response of ß- cell in glucagon stimulation test. If the C-peptide do not increase more than 1.6 after glucagon presence of autoanibodies is more probable.

Leveraging HIPAA to support consumer empowerment.

The consumer empowerment movement needs to provide consumers with more access and control of their healthcare records. The premise of this article is that there is a fundamental market shift towards consumer empowerment--and technology is the driving force. We contend the results will satisfy the intent of the HIPAA mandate. Two restrictions impede the market from moving toward real consumer empowerment. First, managing one's own health history record is difficult because the complete record is segmented in disparate systems that are difficult to integrate. This is because unique identifiers and consistent coding are nonexistent. Second, security and control of patient identifiable health information is still evolving. There is no consensus among providers for Internet security, as we can see by all the legislative privacy bills trying to address the issue. HIPAA is both a legislative mandate and an enabler of the next healthcare paradigm. Providers must comply with the HIPAA mandates for electronic data interchange (EDI) code sets, administrative simplification, and privacy and confidentiality protocols. By recognizing HIPAA as part of a consumer-driven movement, organizations can incorporate empowerment strategies into a planning process that creates consumer options in healthcare and leverages HIPAA compliance to benefit both providers and consumers. This article suggests methods for meeting HIPAA compliance through innovative consumer empowerment methods.