
ABSTRACT: Background: Comorbidities in diabetes have a profound impact on management strategies and patient outcomes. Differentiating the prevalence of these comorbidities between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes can provide valuable insights into the respective disease burdens. Objectives: This observational study aims to assess and compare the prevalence of comorbid conditions in a cohort of 100 patients, with 50 patients diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes and 50 with Type 2 diabetes. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of medical records from an outpatient endocrinology clinic, documenting comorbidities such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, cardiovascular disease, and nephropathy. The presence of each comorbidity was recorded, and the prevalence was calculated as a percentage of the total patients in each diabetes subgroup. Results: Hypertension was present in 45% of the Type 2 diabetes group, compared to 20% in the Type 1 group. Dyslipidemia was observed in 50% of Type 2 patients, while 30% of Type 1 patients were affected. The prevalence of cardiovascular disease was 15% in Type 2 and 5% in Type 1 patients. Nephropathy was noted in 10% of Type 2 and 6% of Type 1 patients. The average number of comorbidities per patient was 2.1 for those with Type 2 diabetes and 1.3 for Type 1, indicating a statistically significant difference (p=0.02). Conclusion: The study highlights a higher prevalence of certain comorbidities, particularly hypertension and dyslipidemia, among patients with Type 2 diabetes compared to those with Type 1. This suggests the need for differential management strategies focusing on the broader comorbid landscape associated with Type 2 diabetes. Keywords: Diabetes Mellitus, Comorbidities, Type 1 Diabetes, Type 2 Diabetes, Health Profile, Observational Study.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
