OBJECTIVE: In 1997, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommended a new diagnostic category, impaired fasting glucose (IFG), to describe individuals with borderline glucose tolerance. On the other hand, the World Health Organization (WHO) suggested retaining the category of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). We studied the prevalence of IFG and IGT in a multiethnic society and compared the cardiovascular risk profiles of subjects with IFG, IGT, or both IFG and IGT. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 3,568 subjects were examined from the 1992 National Health Survey of Singapore, which involved a combination of disproportionately stratified sampling and systematic sampling. Anthropometric, blood pressure, insulin, lipid profile, and uric acid measurements were taken, and a standard 75-g oral glucose tolerance test was performed after a 10-h overnight fast. RESULTS: The prevalence rates of IFG only, IGT only, and both IFT and IGT were 3.45, 10.2, and 3.4%, respectively. The degree of agreement (kappa) between the two diagnostic criteria (the ADA IFG and the WHO IGT) was only 0.25. A fasting glucose level of 5.5 mmol/l was the optimal cutoff for predicting a 2-h postload glucose level of > or =7.8 mmol/l. The following cardiovascular risk factors were higher in subjects with both IFG and IGT compared with those with either IFG or IGT alone: systolic blood pressure (131 +/- 20 vs. 125 +/- 21 and 125 +/- 19 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively); diastolic blood pressure (77 +/- 12 vs. 73 +/- 12 and 74 +/- 12 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.05); BMI (26.2 +/- 4.2 vs. 24.4 +/- 4.0 and 24.6 +/- 4.4 kg/m2, respectively; P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively); waist circumference (84.1 +/- 10.3 vs. 79.3 +/- 10.7 and 79.3 +/- 10.6 cm, respectively; P < 0.001); waist-to-hip ratio (0.84 +/- 0.08 vs. 0.82 +/- 0.09 and 0.81 +/- 0.08, respectively; P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively); fasting insulin (12.1 +/- 9.7 vs. 9.2 +/- 5.3 and 9.9 +/- 7.7 mU/l; P < 0.01); insulin resistance (by homeostasis model assessment [HOMA]) (3.41 +/- 2.77 vs. 2.58 +/- 1.50 and 2.43 +/- 1.83, respectively; P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively); total cholesterol (5.81 +/- 1.1 vs. 5.51 +/- 1.1 and 5.53 +/- 1.1 mmol/l, respectively; P < 0.05) and apolipoprotein(B) [apo(B)] (1.5 +/- 0.38 vs. 1.40 +/- 0.34 and 1.39 +/- 0.35 mmol/l, respectively; P < 0.01). The pattern of difference remained significant only for fasting insulin, insulin resistance (HOMA), and apo(B) (borderline) after adjustment for age, sex, and ethnic differences. CONCLUSIONS: Obvious discordance was evident in the classification of glycemic status when applying the criteria proposed by the ADA (IFG) or WHO (IGT) in a multiethnic society like Singapore. However, subjects with either IFG or IGT had similar cardiovascular risk profiles. Therefore, both criteria identified individuals at high risk for cardiovascular disease. Individuals with both IFG and IGT had a greater incidence of the cardiovascular dysmetabolic syndrome.

Aims: To determine the prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among older community-dwelling people with at least one chronic disease in Singapore.Design: A single-centre cross-sectional study. Methods:The study was conducted in the largest tertiary public hospital in Singapore between May 2019 and December 2019. The community nurses of the hospital recruited a total of 400 community-dwelling older people aged ≥60 years old, who were diagnosed with at least one chronic disease and prescribed with at least one long-term medication. Medication non-adherence was assessed using the self-report 5-item Medication Adherence Report Scale, operationalized as a score of <25. A list of potential factors of medication non-adherence was structured based on the World Health Organization five-domain framework and collected using a self-report questionnaire.Results: Sixty percent (n = 240) of our participants were non-adherent to their medication regime. Older people who smoked (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.14-7.33), perceived their medication regime as being complicated (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.26-5.13), felt dissatisfied with their regime (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.17-5.31), did not know the purpose of all their medications (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.42-4.63) and experienced side effects (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.14-9.67) were found to be predictive of medication non-adherence. Conclusion:Medication adherence was found to be poor in community-dwelling older people in Singapore. The predictors identified in this study can help guide healthcare professionals in identifying older people who are at risk of medication non-adherence and inform the development of interventions to improve adherence. Impact: Medication non-adherence, especially in the older population with chronic diseases, constitutes a serious problem as it undermines the efforts to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with the underlying chronic diseases. To improve adherence, our findings propose the importance of assessing the older person's treatment satisfaction, which includes examining the aspects of side effects, effectiveness and convenience. Additionally, we highlight the need to address the older person's medication knowledge deficit.

People with chronic pain faced potential treatment disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore, as the focus of healthcare shifted. A model of rapid integration of a pain centre with community healthcare teams was implemented to care for vulnerable older patients with chronic pain and multiple comorbidities. Telemedicine and home visits by community nurses were used, with risk-mitigation measures, ensuring comprehensive assessment and treatment compliance. Medications from pain physicians were delivered at home through a hospital pharmacy. A secure national electronic health records system used by all teams ensured seamless access and documentation. Potential emergency department visits, admissions and delayed discharges were thus avoided. Integration of community teams with chronic pain management services can be recommended to ensure pandemic preparedness.

No abstract