METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among subjects with borderline diabetes aged ≥18 years who visited a primary healthcare centre at Universiti Sains Malaysia from January 2017 to December 2018. Sociodemographic, clinical and laboratory data were obtained from electronic medical records. Data were analysed using SPSS version 25.
RESULTS: A total of 250 participants with borderline diabetes were included in the analysis. Of them, 93.6% (n=234) had lipid abnormalities. Isolated dyslipidaemia characterised by a high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level (38.8%, n=97) was the most common pattern found, followed by combined dyslipidaemia of high LDL-C and triglyceride (TG) levels (22.8%, n=57). The male sex was found to be significantly associated with hypertriglyceridemia (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.09-3.1)(P=0.02). Diastolic blood pressure ≥90mmHg was significantly associated with a low HDL-C level (A0R=2.09, 95% CI=1.0-4.1) (P=0.03).
CONCLUSION: The majority of subjects with borderline diabetes have lipid abnormalities. Specifically, isolated dyslipidaemia characterised by a high LDL-C level is alarmingly prevalent. Further large-scale robust studies are needed to confirm the present findings.
Methods: Patients who attended the clinic from April to June 2019 and fulfilled the diagnosis of CKD were included in this study, except for those diagnosed with a urinary tract infection, pregnant women and those on dialysis. These criteria were set based on the CPGs. The standards were set following discussions with the clinic team members with reference to local guidelines, the 2017 United Kingdom National CKD audit and other relevant studies.
Results: A total of 384 medical records were included in this audit. Overall, 5 out of 20 criteria for processes and 3 of 8 clinical outcomes for CKD care did not meet the set standards. These included the following: documentation of CKD classification based on albumin category (43.8%); CKD advice (19.0%); dietitian referral (9.1%); nephrologist referral (45.5%); haemoglobin level monitoring (65.7%); overall blood pressure (BP) control (45.3%); BP readings for diabetic kidney disease (DKD) and non-DKD with > 1 g/day of proteinuria (< 130/80 mmHg, 37.0%); eGFR reduction of < 25% over the past year (77.2%). Identified problems included the absence of a CKD registry, eGFR and albuminuria reports, and a dedicated team, among other factors.
Conclusions: Overall, 8 out of 28 criteria did not meet the standards of CKD care set for this audit. The problems identified in this audit have been addressed. Moreover, strategies have also been formulated to improve the diagnosis and management of CKD in this clinic.