BackgroundEpidemiology of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) among children aged 0-4 years globally is not well understood. We aim to assess the incidence of T1DM in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) by conducting a systematic review of previous reports. We also aim to address possible contribution to child mortality and to identify any temporal trends.MethodsA systematic review was performed using a carefully designed search strategy to explore MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health databases. Data was extracted from all studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria –a total of 83 records extracted from 26 830 sources that were analysed. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) process to assess quality of evidence and applied meta-analysis approaches to assess global and regional incidence and time trends.ResultsThe overall pooled incidence of T1DM in children aged 0-4 years globally is 11.2 (95% CI = 10.0-12.3) per 100 000 child years. The regional incidence were the highest for European Region A (EUR A) at 15.5 (95% CI = 13.5-17.5) per 100 000 child years. EUR C had the incidence of 10.0 (95% CI = 6.5-13.6) and EUR B 5.8 (95% CI = 4.7-7.0), Region of the Americas A (AMR A) 11.4 (95% CI = 7.8-14.9), AMR B of 2.5 (95% CI = 0.2-4.8), Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR B) 7.1 (95% CI = 4.2-10.0) and Western Pacific Region (WPR A) 7.0 (95% CI = 2.9-11.0) per 100 000 child years, while other regions had very low rates or no data. When data points were categorised in the study periods and re-analysed, an increasing trend of the T1DM incidence was observed, with the incidence of 20.9 (95% CI = 7.8-34.1) per 100 000 child years in the years 2010-2015, preceded by 13.2 (95% CI = 11.0-15.5) in 2000-2009 study period, 10.0 (95% CI = 8.4-11.7) in 1990-1999 and 8.3 (95% CI = 5.1-11.6) in 1980-1989, respectively. Although the data are scarce, and variation and uncertainty are large, we estimated that the number of new cases of T1DM among children aged 0-4 years in the world each year is between 100 000 and 150 000.ConclusionsThe identified large variation in incidence estimates for different parts of the world, along with scarcity of information and the identified strong temporal increase in T1DM incidence suggest a clear need for further research into this subject.
Background/Aims Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plays an increasingly important role in diagnosing and monitoring patients with inflammatory arthropathies due to its ability to detect early, sometimes subclinical, inflammatory changes, including synovitis. It is a sensitive, accurate and relatively non-operator dependent modality. However, it is typically perceived as expensive and time-consuming, and is used infrequently for evaluation of synovitis in clinical care. MRI is thought to be generally well-tolerated by patients, however, there is a paucity of research on patient experience of MRI, particularly in rheumatology where patients may have complex and/or chronic pain. To improve the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and overall utility of MRI for clinicians and patients, we introduced a short synovitis MRI protocol (MRI-SSP) for rapid assessment of synovitis in the hands and feet. Here, we evaluated the acceptability of MRI-SSP to patients and the perceived utility of the protocol for rheumatologists. Methods Different structured questionnaires were designed for patients and rheumatologists which contained qualitative (free-text) and quantitative (five-point Likert-scale) questions. All patients undergoing MRI-SSP of the hand or wrist at University College London Hospital (UCLH) between 01/02/22 to 01/07/22 were prospectively invited to participate and completed the questionnaire via telephone within four weeks of their scan. All rheumatologists at our centre were invited to respond to an online questionnaire. Likert scores were analysed quantitatively and thematic analysis was performed on free-text comments. Results Patient experience - 30 patients agreed to participate (mean age 48 years, range 21-74; 87% female). Average patient Numerical Pain Rating Scale score was 5.1/10 (range 1-10). We found that: 90% found the scan length acceptable; 90% had no or mild side-effects from intravenous contrast; 40% had no pain during the scan; 57% had no anxiety during the scan; 97% found the scan acceptable overall; 97% would be happy to have the scan again; scan length and comfort were important for patients; good radiographer communication helped to alleviate patient anxiety. Rheumatologist perception - 10 rheumatologists responded. Of these, 40% perform ultrasound to assess for synovitis in clinic. We found that: 90% strongly agreed that the MRI-SSP report was helpful in answering clinical questions; 90% strongly agreed that the MRI-SSP influenced clinical decision making; there was a mixed response regarding which modality rheumatologists preferred for assessing synovitis (40% no preference, 30% MRI, 30% ultrasound) and this was independent of which rheumatologists performed ultrasound in clinic. Conclusion Overall, patients found MRI-SSP to be an acceptable investigation, and rheumatologists felt it helpful in clinical decision-making. Important factors affecting patient acceptability were scan length and comfort. In general, our results suggest that dedicated short MRI scanning protocols have the potential to improve the acceptability and accessibility of MRI for rheumatology patients. Disclosure N. Thorley: None. L. Dwyer-Hemmings: None. S. Singh: None. T.J.P. Bray: None. L. Bida: None. M.A. Hall-Craggs: None.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.