Yes it was, I think...it was 2014. The issue is the Dr's are saying I was not pré diabetic or even diabetic it was normal and therefore they had no responsibility to inform me.This was a fasting glucose test? If so, it's not the cusp of pre-diabetes.
Normal: Below 5.5 mmol/l (100 mg/dl)
Impaired fasting glucose: Between 5.5 and 6.9 mmol/l (between 100 mg/dl and 125 mg/dl)
Diabetic: 7.0 mmol/l and above (126 mg/dl and above)
A fasting plasma glucose test, also known as a fasting glucose test (FGT), is a test that can be used to help diagnose diabetes or pre-diabetes.
A fasting plasma glucose test, also known as a fasting glucose test (FGT), is a test that can be used to help diagnose diabetes or pre-diabetes.www.diabetes.co.uk
Pre Diabetes
- Thread starter laura53
- Start Date
As others have said, they can't diagnose anything from a singular plasma blood glucose result. In my opinion, it's not so much a problem that they didn't inform you that you were prediabetic, because they couldn't know that from one result of this type. However, it could be argued that further investigation should have been undertaken, in the form of another blood test for an hba1c result. That would have then allowed them to determine a diagnosis.
All that said, I don't know if the thresholds have been changed for what would be considered an abnormal result on a fasting plasma blood glucose test since 2014.
- Messages
- 2,960
- Type of diabetes
- Treatment type
- Diet only
My copy of Bilous and Donnelly was published in 2010 and would have been current in 2014. It gives several methods of diagnosing diabetes, one of which is a fasting plasma glucose level equal to or greater than 7.0mmol/litre (the same as given in CatsFive's post above) A reading of 7.8 should therefore have triggered (IMO) either a firm diagnosis of diabetes at that point or a second test to confirm, if there was some reason to doubt the initial test's reliability.
The issue is at my recent appointment after this latest diagnosis the nurse said "it shouldn't be a surprise as you were pre diabetic in 2014". My point is I was never told that. At a second appointment with the same nurse she changed her mind and said diabetic not pre diabetic. The Practice manager however said there was no evidence of any issue in 2014. I'm trying to ascertain if there was cause to at least do à follow up? Everything I see says 7.8 is worthy of a follow up and informing the patient.
Following @KennyA's post above, where he confirms that 2014 result was a valid indicator at the time, I'd say you're on safe ground to ask why no follow up tests were done, or informed of that result.
CatsFive
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 364
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
I am deeply sorry you were never told, but you are where you are. Have you had a recent HbA1c? This is the main means of diagnosis in the UK. If not, I would press very, very strongly for one.
However since you list yourself as type 2, on oral medication, I suspect you have. I'm also not sure where you are trying to go with this. Presumably there is something you want to do with 2014?
