Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency and Associated Risk Factors in the US Population (2011-2012)

Abstract

Introduction1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), the hormonally active form of vitamin D3, is a lipid-soluble compound that plays a significant role in clinical medicine due to its potent effects on calcium homeostasis and bone metabolism. Since foods containing natural vitamin D are rare, the primary source of the compound remains its nonenzymatic dermal synthesis through exposure to ultraviolet rays in sunlight. Although uncommon in most developed countries, recent literature has demonstrated that subclinical vitamin D deficiency can exist in certain populations and plays a role in downstream clinical consequences, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and fractures. This study aims to identify the prevalence and change in the pattern of vitamin D deficiency in subpopulations throughout the United States to provide a foundation for further clinical studies correlating the clinical outcomes to vitamin deficiency.MethodsData analyzed in this study were collected through National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), specifically from a population of 4962 participants, age ≥20 years, who were hospitalized between 2011 and 2012. This cohort was stratified to divide the population into patients that were vitamin D sufficient (>50 nmol/L) versus patients who were vitamin D deficient (50 nmol/L). The risk factors were compared between the subpopulations in 2005-2006 and 2011-2012.ConclusionsThe prevalence of vitamin D deficiency is greater in certain clinical subpopulations, and the presence of associated characteristics should raise the index of suspicion for the practicing clinician with regard to conditions associated with vitamin D deficiency, such as osteoporosis and osteomalacia. Further research investigating the pathophysiology of hypovitaminosis D and its clinical consequences can help better understand and prevent the development of associated comorbidities.

Vitamin D levels and cancer incidence in 217,244 individuals from primary health care in Denmark

“…Information on important lifestyle risk factors as smoking, obesity, unhealthy diet and physical inactivity were not available in the current study and confounding by these factors are thereby possible. However, these factors are most often found related to lower blood levels of vitamin D. It is therefore more likely that adjustment for these factors would lead to the opposite finding in our study, i.e.…”

Impact of the Glycemic Control and Duration of Type 2 Diabetes on Vitamin D Level and Cardiovascular Disease Risk

“…Deficiency in vitamin D is a global concern; approximately one billion people in the world have low vitamin D levels [3]. In the United States, according to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012, about 40% of men and women were vitamin D deficient [4]. In Saudi Arabia, approximately 81% of the different population groups has vitamin D deficiency, and this condition is more prevalent in women compared to men [5].…”

What can we learn from the Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes (D2d) Study?

“…It is noteworthy that only 18% of enrolled persons had VitD levels of 12‐19 ng/mL; just 4% had levels below 12 ng/mL; 37% had levels of 20‐29 ng/mL; and 38% actually had levels of 30 ng/mL or more. That means that only 22% of participants in the D2d Study were VitD deficient, while in the general US population the prevalence of this degree of VitD deficiency is nearly 40% and that in the Australian population is 31%, suggesting that the study population was one for which VitD therapy may not be expected to be effective. It is also noteworthy that the per‐protocol analysis, in which only patients who strictly followed the instructions and completed the entire trial were analyzed, showed that diabetes risk reduction was 16%.…”