title: Random blood glucose: a robust risk factor for type 2 diabetes.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Although random blood glucose (RBG) values are common in clinical practice, the role of elevated RBG values as a risk factor for type 2 diabetes is not well described.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  This study aimed to examine nondiagnostic, RBG values as a risk factor for type 2 diabetes
  
  
  METHODS
  This was a cross-sectional study of National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) participants (2005-2010).
  
  
  METHODS
  Nonfasting NHANES participants (n = 13 792) without diagnosed diabetes were included.
  
  
  METHODS
  The primary outcome was glycemic status (normal glycemia, undiagnosed prediabetes, or undiagnosed diabetes) using hemoglobin HbA1C as the criterion standard.
  
  
  METHODS
  Multinomial logistic regression examined associations between diabetes risk factors and RBG values according to glycemic status. Associations between current U.S. screening strategies and a hypothetical RBG screening strategy with undiagnosed diabetes were examined.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In unadjusted analyses, a single RBG ≥ 100 mg/dL (5.6 mmol/L) was more strongly associated with undiagnosed diabetes than any single risk factor (odds ratio [OR], 31.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21.3-45.5) and remained strongly associated with undiagnosed diabetes (OR, 20.4; 95% CI, 14.0-29.6) after adjustment for traditional diabetes risk factors. Using RBG < 100 mg/dL as a reference, the adjusted odds of undiagnosed diabetes increased significantly as RBG increased. RBG 100-119 mg/dL (OR 7.1; 95% CI 4.4-11.4); RBG 120-139 mg/dL (OR 30.3; 95% CI 20.0-46.0); RBG ≥ 140 mg/dL (OR 256; 95% CI 150.0-436.9). As a hypothetical screening strategy, an elevated RBG was more strongly associated with undiagnosed diabetes than current United States Preventative Services Task Force guidelines (hypertension alone; P < .0001) and similar to American Diabetes Association guidelines (P = .12).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A single RBG ≥ 100 mg/dL is more strongly associated with undiagnosed diabetes than traditional risk factors. Abnormal RBG values are a risk factor for diabetes and should be considered in screening guidelines.
authors: Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.E.B., E.A.H.), Division of Outcomes and Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Sciences (M.E.B., L.X., E.A.H.), Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine (I.L.), and Department of Clinical Sciences (I.L.), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas 75390.
authors: Michael E
authors: ME
authors: Bowen
authors: Lei
authors: L
authors: Xuan
authors: Ildiko
authors: I
authors: Lingvay
authors: Ethan A
authors: EA
authors: Halm
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001786:Blood Glucose / Q000032:analysis*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003924:Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Q000097:blood* / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005260:Female; D006442:Glycated Hemoglobin / Q000032:analysis; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods; D008875:Middle Aged; D009749:Nutrition Surveys; D011236:Prediabetic State / Q000097:blood / Q000175:diagnosis; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011379:Prognosis; D012307:Risk Factors
chemical_list: D001786:Blood Glucose; D006442:Glycated Hemoglobin; C517652:hemoglobin A1c protein, human
references: Diabetes Care. 2003 Mar;26(3):725-31
references: 12610029
references: Clin Chem. 2011 Jun;57(6):e1-e47
references: 21617152
references: Lancet. 2014 Mar 22;383(9922):1068-83
references: 24315620
references: Popul Health Metr. 2010 Oct 22;8:29
references: 20969750
references: Am J Prev Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):403-9
references: 20307809
references: Lancet. 2012 Jun 16;379(9833):2279-90
references: 22683128
references: Ann Intern Med. 2014 Sep 2;161(5):328-35
references: 25178569
references: Diabetes Care. 2014 Jan;37 Suppl 1:S14-80
references: 24357209
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2008 May;23(5):528-35
references: 18335280
references: Diabetes. 1993 Nov;42(11):1663-72
references: 8405710
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Jan;17(1):23-8
references: 11903772
references: Am J Prev Med. 2010 Jan;38(1):110-7
references: 20117566
references: Clin Chem. 2005 Apr;51(4):753-8
references: 15684277
references: Diabetes Care. 2008 May;31(5):884-6
references: 18310308
references: Diabetes Care. 2010 Mar;33(3):562-8
references: 20067953
references: Ann Intern Med. 2008 Jun 3;148(11):846-54
references: 18519930
references: Ann Epidemiol. 2004 Aug;14(7):507-16
references: 15301787
references: Eff Clin Pract. 2002 Jan-Feb;5(1):11-6
references: 11874191
references: Diabetes Care. 1994 Oct;17(10):1158-63
references: 7821136
references: Vital Health Stat 2. 2013 Sep;(161):1-24
references: 25090154
references: BMJ. 2011;343:d7163
references: 22123912
references: Diabetes Care. 2008 Aug;31(8):1473-8
references: 18540046
references: Popul Health Metr. 2014 May 07;12:12
references: 24904239
references: Diabetes Care. 2000 Oct;23(10):1563-80
references: 11023153
references: Diabetes Care. 2004 Jan;27(1):9-12
references: 14693958
references: Ann Intern Med. 2009 Dec 1;151(11):775-83
references: 19949143
references: Lancet. 2009 Nov 14;374(9702):1677-86
references: 19878986