Back

National Changes in Diabetes Care Practices during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prospective Study of US Adults

Vashist, K.; Hassan, S.; Weber, M. B.; Quarells, R. C.; Patel, S. A.

2023-08-09 public and global health
10.1101/2023.08.06.23293722 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThere is a lack of nationally representative prospective data on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes care and management in adults with type 2 diabetes. We examined changes in diabetes care and management practices before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsUsing the National Health Interview Survey, we analyzed data from 870 adults living with type 2 diabetes who were interviewed in 2019 and re-interviewed between August and December 2020. Exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic was defined by year of survey (2019, pre-pandemic; 2020, pandemic). We estimated percent change in past year blood sugar check by a health professional and current use of blood sugar lowering medication overall and by sociodemographic subgroups. ResultsReceiving an annual blood sugar test fell by -3.3 percentage points (pp) (95% CI -5.7, -1.0), from 98.3% in 2019 to 95.0% in late 2020. The reduction in annual blood glucose testing was largely consistent across socio-demographic groups and was particularly pronounced among adults not working and adults aged 65 years and older. In the same time period, current use of diabetes medications increased by +3.8 pp (0.7, 6.9), from 85.9% to 89.7%. The increase in medication use was most pronounced among individuals aged 40-64-year old, employed, and those living in large central metropolitan areas. ConclusionsNationally, adults with Type 2 diabetes reported a reduction in annual blood glucose testing by a health professional and an increase in diabetes medication usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. If sustained after the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency, these changes have implications for national diabetes management and care.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.