Prevalence of diagnosed diabetes and quality of care among Greenlanders and non-Greenlanders in Greenland

- A higher prevalence of diagnosed diabetes is observed among non-Greenlanders compared to Greenlanders.
- Quality of diabetes care in Greenland has improved since implementation of a national diabetes programme in 2008.
- Prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in Greenland has increased compared to earlier studies.
- Continued monitoring of diabetes prevalence and quality of care is recommended.

AimsTo estimate the actual prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in Greenland as at 2014, and to evaluate the quality of diabetes care among Greenlanders and non-Greenlanders in Greenland, six years after a national diabetes program was initiated.MethodsThe study was designed as an observational cross-sectional study based on review of data obtained from the electronic medical record (EMR) in Greenland. All permanent residents of Greenland who as at October 2014 were registered with the diagnosis diabetes in the EMR (n = 1071) were included in the study. The prevalence was calculated using the population in Greenland as at first of June 2014 as background population. Quality of diabetes care was determined using indicators proposed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.ResultsThe prevalence among Greenlanders aged 20-79 years was 2.36% (95% CI 2.19-2.52) and significantly lower than the prevalence among non-Greenlanders in the same age group, which was 3.69% (95% CI 2.18-4.20). More Greenlanders than non-Greenlanders had glycosylated haemoglobin below 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), blood pressure below 140/90 mmHg and their blood pressure measured within the last year. No other differences in quality of diabetes care were observed between the groups.ConclusionsA higher prevalence of diagnosed diabetes was observed among non-Greenlanders compared to Greenlanders, while no major differences were observed in quality of care between the two groups. The overall prevalence of diagnosed diabetes has increased compared to earlier studies. Continued monitoring of prevalence and quality of care is recommended.