Incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis does not differ in Ramadan compared to other months and seasons: results from a 6-year multicenter study

N/ACitations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a life-threatening adverse complication of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). It is postulated that fasting during Ramadan can increase the risk of DKA; however, there are contradicting data in this regard. Furthermore, studies from Western countries have suggested a seasonal variation in the incidence of DKA. This study examines the differences in the number of DKA episodes during Ramadan compared to the rest of the year in patients with type 1 DM (T1D) and type 2 DM (T2D). Besides, we aim to examine the seasonal difference in the incidence of DKA. Methods: We included consecutive index-DKA admissions from 2015 to 2021 and used descriptive statistics to compare the episodes of DKA in Ramadan vs other months and seasons. Results: Of 922 patients, 480 (52%) had T1D, whereas 442 (48%) had T2D. The median age (IQR) was 35 (25–45) years, with the majority being Arab (N = 502, 54.4%). There were 94 DKA admissions in six collective Ramadan months, whereas the DKA admissions ranged from 61 to 88 episodes in other months (p =.3). The highest DKA admissions were observed in Autumn (N = 236) and the lowest in Spring (N = 226) with no statistically significant difference (p =.4). There were no differences in DKA severity or new-onset diabetes rates when analyzed based on Hiji months, Roman months, or seasons. Conclusions: DKA occurrence is not increased during Ramadan. We found no evidence of seasonal variations in the rates of DKA in the State of Qatar.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ata, F., Khan, A. A., Khamees, I., & Bashir, M. (2023). Incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis does not differ in Ramadan compared to other months and seasons: results from a 6-year multicenter study. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 39(8), 1061–1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2023.2231306

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free