The ankle-brachial index (ABI) is a method used widely for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) diagnosis and cardiovascular risk prediction. This study validated automated ABI measurements taken using an oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitor allowing simultaneous arm-leg BP measurements. A total of 93 patients (hypertension 83%; dyslipidemia 72%; diabetes 45%; cardiovascular disease 23%; smoking 15%) were submitted to Doppler and automated ABI measurements, performed using a professional oscillometric BP monitor (Microlife WatchBP Office; triplicate simultaneous arm-leg BP measurements), in a randomized order. The mean difference between the Doppler reading (1.08±0.17) and (1) the first oscillometric ABI reading was 0.03±0.11, (2) the average of two oscillometric readings was 0.02±0.10 and (3) the average of three oscillometric readings was 0.02 ± 0.09 (Po0.01 for all). Strong correlations were found between oscillometric and Doppler ABI (r 0.80, 0.85 and 0.86 for single and average of two and three oscillometric readings, respectively; Po0.001 for all). Agreement between oscillometric and Doppler ABI in diagnosing PAD (Doppler ABI o0.9) was found in 95% of cases (j 0.79; agreement in diabetics: 94%, j 0.79). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve revealed area under the curve at 0.98, with a 0.97 oscillometric ABI cutoff for optimal sensitivity (92%) and specificity (92%) in diagnosing PAD. Average time for automated ABI measurement was 5.8 vs. 9.3 min for Doppler (Po0.001). Doppler and oscillometric ABI were associated and predicted (multivariate regression analysis) by the same cardiovascular risk factors (pulse pressure, smoking and cardiovascular disease history). Automated ABI measurement using a professional BP monitor allowing simultaneous arm-leg BP measurements appears to be a reliable and faster alternative to Doppler measurement.

Although data from literature suggest that diabetic women are frequently under screened for gynaecological cancers little is known about screening implementation for other cancers for both genders. This study investigates comprehensive cancer screening practices of diabetics as compared with non-diabetics; analyses screening patterns both by gender and level of evidence and reveals target subgroups that should be paid more attention for screening implementation. 675 diabetics vs. 5772 non-diabetic Greek individuals entered the PACMeR 02 cancer screening study. Diabetic women reported significantly lower performance for the sex-specific evidence-based cancer screening tests and digital rectal examination (DRE) as compared with non-diabetics (P < 0.05). Diabetic women older than 60 years old, of elementary education, housewives and farmers showed the lowest performance rates (P < 0.01). Prostate cancer screening was higher among diabetic men with ultrasound and DRE reaching statistical significance (P < 0.05). Subgroups analysis did not reveal a hidden relationship. Both genders of diabetics reported never performing skin examination at higher rates (P < 0.001), although screening intent is extremely low in both diabetics and non-diabetics (<1%). Evidence-based screening coverage was inconsistent in both genders independently by the diabetic status. Primary care efforts should be provided to implement presymptomatic cancer control.

No abstract

The level of CCS coverage among the examined sample of Greek adults was discouraging. Surveys among other European countries are encouraged.

Background: Data comparison between SEER and EUROCARE database provided evidence that colorectal cancer survival in USA is higher than in European countries. Since adjustment for stage at diagnosis markedly reduces the survival differences, a screening bias was hypothesized. Considering the important role of primary care in screening activities, the purpose of the study was to investigate the colorectal cancer screening awareness among Hellenic physicians.