Although pre-diabetes remains a serious health issue contributing to high blood sugar levels, its sugar levels are still low for it to be diagnosed as type 2 diabetes. As a result, it case means pre-diabetes remains a high-risk state for diabetes. In most cases, it is characterized by higher than normal blood glucose levels but not generally in the range related to diabetes. Studies show a rise in regard to the prevalence of pre-diabetes in most states. In particular, most developed nations have more than one-third of their populations with pre-diabetes. Over 88 million people, particularly in America, have pre-diabetes. For years, hypertension guidelines recommend dual-arm measurement of blood pressure. However, studies show the practice is still poor in most states (Ojo et al., 2020). Besides, significance is still largely unidentified. Diabetes has therefore remained a prevalent condition in the united states as well as others states globally.
While no cure has been developed for diabetes, pre-diabetes remains the last and most important opportunity for any patient to act and have control of their health. This case plays a critical role in preventing a lifetime battle with health issue related diabetes. Logically, the diagnosis of pre-diabetes is simple. However, most patients still miss the opportunity, thus contributing to more diabetic patients. Studies show about twenty-three percent of pre-diabetic patients are diagnosed hence starting an appropriate therapy (Mainous et al., 2016). This case means millions of pre-diabetic patients miss the opportunity, which leads to diabetes.
As a result, the benefit of pre-diabetes diagnosis among affected patients has become a major debate. Recently, there has been acknowledgment regarding how organizational context and policies impact or frame general process of making effective decisions. However, there is still a lack of reliable evidence on how this impacts dilemmas and, most importantly, uncertainty regarding decision-making in practice. As a result, this case plays a critical role in adding more weight for argument that treatment burden in consideration to missed diagnosis opportunities for pre-diabetes must be included in clinical guidelines with a primary aim of reducing general limits of opportunities missed for missed opportunities for diagnosis among for pre-diabetes patients (Burch et al., 2019).
References
Burch, P., Blakeman, T., Bower, P., & Sanders, C. (2019). Understanding the diagnosis of pre-diabetes in patients aged over 85 in English primary care: a qualitative study. BMC family practice, 20(1), 1-10.
Mainous, A. G., Tanner, R. J., & Baker, R. (2016). Prediabetes diagnosis and treatment in primary care. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 29(2), 283-285.
Ojo, O. S., Egunjobi, A. O., Fatusin, A. J., Fatusin, B. B., Ojo, O. O., Ololade, F. A., … & Adesokan, A. A. (2020). Magnitude of missed opportunities for prediabetes screening among non-diabetic adults attending the family practice clinic in Western Nigeria: Implication for diabetes prevention. South African Family Practice, 62(1).
Leave a Reply