The results of the A1C-Derived Average Glucose study (ADAG), published
in Diabetes Care, have affirmed the existence of a linear relationship
between A1C and average blood glucose levels.
In light of the study results, ADA is recommending the use of a new term
in diabetes management, estimated average glucose, eAG. Health care
providers can now report A1C results to patients using the same units
(mg/dl or mmol/l) that patients see routinely in blood glucose
measurements.
A1c and average glucose level
The results of the A1C-Derived Average Glucose study (ADAG), published in Diabetes Care this month, have affirmed the existence of a linear relationship between A1C and average blood glucose levels. Prior studies using limited numbers of meter glucose readings primarily in type 1 Caucasian populations had been used in the past to estimate average glucose. The international ADAG study clarified the very close linkage using about 2700 glucose readings per subject per A1C measurement, and verified that the relationship holds in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, of all ages, of both genders, and across ethnic/racial groups. The “new numbers” are somewhat different than those in the old tables of A1C vs. average glucose.
In light of the study results, health care providers can confidently report A1C results to patients using the same units (mg/dl or mmol/l) that patients see routinely in blood glucose measurements. For more information about the ADAG study, a table of A1C and the corresponding estimated average glucose, an eAG calculator, and other materials, go to http://professional.diabetes.org/glucosecalculator.aspx
The relationship between A1C and eAG is described by the formula 28.7 * A1C – 46.7 = eAG.
A1C eAG
% mg/dl mmol/l
6 126 7.0
6.5 140 7.8
7 154 8.6
7.5 169 9.4
8 183 10.1
8.5 197 10.9
9 212 11.8
9.5 226 12.6
10 240 13.4
Physical activity in NHIS
The purpose of this site is to describe the history of NHIS adult physical activity questions and provide tools for identifying, accessing, and using NHIS physical activity data, collected since 1975.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhis/physicalactivity/physical_activity_homepage.htm
-----Original Message-----
In this 2002 article "The Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes", the
ADA uses IFG and IGT, but not prediabetes.
But in early 2002 the DPP came out, and during 2002 prediabetes was used
pretty widely, including in articles/lettters by Venkat, Mike, Frank.
Don't know when the first use was (possibly much earlier) or who coined
the term.
By 2003, the ADA was using "pre-diabetes" in its clinical practice
guidelines.
The 2002 or 2003 web-only position statement on prediabetes seems to
have disappeared, as you mentioned. Might have a print out somewhere.
In any case, you can say that the term prediabetes, meaning IFG or IGT,
came into wider use in 2002 after release of DPP results.
