[Prevalence of diabetes mellitus in young Asian Indian immigrants in Santa Coloma de Gramenet (Spain)]

Abstract

Background and objective: There is a general agreement to consider Asian Indian subjects, specially those who immigrated to Western countries, as a high-risk population to develop type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). This could be mainly explained by reasons based on the immigration changes, particularly the metabolic impact of a westernized diet (environmental hypothesis) or reasons based in the presence of tissue resistance to insulin (genetic hypothesis). The aim of the study was to estimate the prevalence of DM2 in 3 populations of Asian Indian immigrants, non-Asian Indian immigrants and autochthonous subjects.

Population and method: An observational multicenter study was performed in 3 primary care centers from Santa Coloma de Gramenet (Barcelona, Spain). Subjects from Asian Indian, non-Asian Indian and autochthonous origin born between 1948-73 were compared. Their DM2 prevalence as well as sociodemographic and clinical data among diabetic patients were analyzed.

Results: The overall prevalence of DM2 was 4.6 %. The prevalence of DM2 was higher among Asian Indian immigrants (20.9%, 95% CI, 12.1-29.1) compared with autochthonous (3.6%; 95% CI, 2.9-9.3; p < 0.001) and non-Asian Indian immigrants (9.7%; 95% CI, 5.3-14.1; p = 0.013). Nevertheless, differences between autochthonous and non-Asian Indian immigrants were found (p < 0.001). Asian Indians subjects had an earlier diagnosis age, especially those younger than 44 years, than those of non-Asian Indian immigrants and autochthonous groups (p < 0.002 and p < 0.006, respectively).

Conclusions: Taken together, these results suggest that young immigrant populations have a higher prevalence of DM2 compared with autochthonous ones. Indeed, the prevalence of DM2 among immigrant Asian Indians represents the highest reported in the European Union so far and shows differences with non-Asian Indian immigrants. In spite of this, these differences are not totally conclusive in statistical terms; further studies are needed to compare both populations.