Application of the FINDRISK Test for the Detection and Monitoring of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Risk in Primary Care
Main Article Content
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2786-7301
Juan Alcides Álvarez Cabrera
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5536-4878
Luis Fabián Ruschel
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3036-4086
Abstract
Introduction: Type 2 diabetes mellitus affects millions of people worldwide and often remains undiagnosed until complications arise. In primary care centers, where early warning signs are first detected, having practical tools to help identify individuals at risk can make a significant difference in the lives of many patients. The FINDRISK test represents a concrete opportunity to anticipate the disease.
Objective: To determine the risk of developing T2DM according to the FINDRISK test in a USF of the Paraguayan public health system and determine the biochemical parameters of patients with moderate to very high risk according to the FINDRISK test. In addition, the sociodemographic characteristics of the population were detailed, and the parameters evaluated in the applied test were described.
Methodology: An observational, descriptive, and cross-sectional study was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, the FINDRISK test was applied to 460 individuals over 18 years of age. In the second phase, clinical and laboratory assessments were performed on patients with moderate to very high risk (142 individuals), including fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and lipid profile, as well as the application of metabolic syndrome criteria according to ATP-III.
Results: 30.9% of patients assessed with the FINDRISK test presented a moderate to very high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Among these, elevated rates of overweight or obesity (70.4%), physical inactivity (68.3%), family history of type 2 diabetes (45.1%), and low consumption of fruits and vegetables (59.2%) were observed. Laboratory analyses in this group demonstrated metabolic alterations: 69.7% had prediabetic values, and 10.6% had HbA1c values greater than 6.5%. Metabolic syndrome was present in more than a quarter of cases according to ATP-III criteria, with a statistically significant association with patients exhibiting any degree of risk as per the test.
Conclusion: The implementation of the FINDRISK test enabled the timely identification of a significant group of individuals at risk for type 2 diabetes. Its use in primary care, accompanied by clinical and laboratory follow-up, represents a viable, accessible, and replicable strategy to improve community health.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 11th ed. Brussels, Belgium: International Diabetes Federation; 2025. Available from: https://www.diabetesatlas.org
3. Aschner P. Diabetes trends in Latin America. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2002;18 Suppl 3: S27-S31. doi:10.1002/dmrr.280.
4. Ministerio de Salud Pública y Bienestar Social (MSPBS). Segunda Encuesta Nacional sobre Factores de Riesgo de Enfermedades No Transmisibles, Paraguay 2022. Asunción, Paraguay: MSPBS; 2023. Available from: https://www.ine.gov.py/.
5. Peer N, Balakrishna Y, Durao S. Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020; 5:CD005266. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005266.pub2.
6. ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda VR, et al. Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes and Associated Comorbidities: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care. 2023;46(Suppl 1): S41-S48. doi:10.2337/dc23-S003.
7. Saeedi P, Petersohn I, Salpea P, et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: Results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019; 157:107843. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2019.107843.
8. Lindström J, Tuomilehto J. The diabetes risk score: a practical tool to predict type 2 diabetes risk. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(3):725-731. doi:10.2337/diacare.26.3.725.
9. Lim HM, Tan MY, Lim YMF, et al. Performance of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) and Modified Asian FINDRISC (ModAsian FINDRISC) for screening of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and dysglycaemia in primary care. Prim Care Diabetes. 2020;14(5):494-500. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2020.02.008.
10. Pérez Montero J, Pérez Montero A, Játiva Serrano L, Romero Cansino S. Aplicación de la Escala de Findrisc para valorar el riesgo individual de desarrollar diabetes mellitus tipo 2 en el noroccidente de Quito-Ecuador. Pract Fam Rural. 2019;4(1). Available from: https://practicafamiliarrural.org.
11. Clavijo C, Tamayo Medina M, Cortés D, et al. Análisis de la asociación entre el riesgo de diabetes y el riesgo cardiovascular en una población colombiana: resultados basados en las escalas de la Findrisk y la OPS. Rev ACE. 2025;12(1). Available from: https://revistaendocrino.org.
12. Salinero-Fort MA, de Burgos-Lunar C, Mostaza JM, et al. Validating prediction scales of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain: the SPREDIA-2 population-based prospective cohort study protocol. BMJ Open. 2015;5(4): e007195. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007195.
13. Álvarez Cabrera JA, Chamorro LI, Ruschel LF. El test de FINDRISK como primera acción en atención primaria en salud para identificar el riesgo de desarrollo de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 en la población general. Rev Virtual Soc Parag Med Int. 2023;10(1):41-49. doi:10.18004/rvspmi/2312-3893/2023.10.01.41.
14. Varela-Vega Y, Roy-García IA, Pérez-Rodríguez M, Velázquez-López L. Certeza diagnóstica del instrumento FINDRISC para identificar resistencia a la insulina en adultos. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2023;61(1):33-41. PMID:36542467.
15. Ture N, Emecen AN, Unal B. Validation of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score and development of a country-specific diabetes prediction model for Turkey. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2025;26: e18. doi:10.1017/S1463423625000180.
16. Guevara Tirado A. Determinación del riesgo de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 en la población peruana. Encuesta Demográfica y de Salud Familiar 2022. Rev Soc Argent Diabetes. 2024;58(1):34-40. doi:10.47196/diab.v58i1.727.
17. Costa B, Barrio F, Piñol JL, et al. Shifting from glucose diagnosis to the new HbA1c diagnosis reduces the capability of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) to screen for glucose abnormalities. BMC Med. 2013; 11:45. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-45.
18. Gutiérrez-Ruvalcaba L, Gómez-Pérez FJ. Validación del FINDRISC en población mexicana. Salud Publica Mex. 2019;61(3):289-295. Available from: https://saludpublica.mx.
19. Benozzi SF, Unger G, Pennacchiotti GL. Calidad en la etapa preanalítica: importancia del ayuno. Acta Bioquím Clín Latinoam. 2016;50(4): 643-648. Available from: https://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0325-29572016000400012.
20. Lipsy RJ. The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. J Manag Care Pharm. 2003;9(1 Suppl):2-5. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2003.9.s1.2.
21. World Health Organization. Diabetes. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/es/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes.
22. Ministerio de Salud Pública y Bienestar Social (MSPBS). Primera Encuesta Nacional de Factores de Riesgo de Enfermedades No Transmisibles. 1st ed. Asunción, Paraguay: MSPBS; 2012. Available from: https://www.ine.gov.py/.
23. Cantillo M, Gómez-Camargo D, Arrieta G, et al. Prevalencia de factores de riesgo cardiovascular en población adulta de Cartagena, Colombia. Rev Salud Publica (Bogotá). 2019;21(2):156-163. Available from: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/74492.
24. García Bello LB, Menoni de Lezcano MC, García LB, Centurión OA. Frecuencia de factores de riesgo para el desarrollo de prediabetes en el personal sanitario. Rev Paraguaya Salud Pública. 2016;6(2):34-41. Available from: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/5678124.pdf.
25. Membreño Cantarero M, Ramírez Pineda J. Risk of developing diabetes mellitus type 2: San Matías, Francisco Morazán, Honduras. Int J Med Res Health Sci. 2019;8(11):25-30. Available from: https://www.itmedicalteam.pl/articles/risk-of-developing-diabetes-mellitus-type-2-san-matas-francsico-morazan-honduras.pdf.
26. Montes-Ochoa G, Torres-Valencia J, Gómez-de la Torre JC, González-Rodríguez M, Núñez-Díaz JA. Prevalencia de factores de riesgo cardiovascular en estudiantes universitarios de la Facultad de Medicina. Rev Fac Med. 2019;67(2): 207-215. Available from: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revfacmed/article/view/74492.
27. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 14. Children and adolescents: Standards of care in diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(Suppl 1):S258-S281. doi:10.2337/dc24-S014.
28. Soriguer F, Goday A, Bosch-Comas A, et al. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus and impaired glucose regulation in Spain: the [email protected] Study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;146:36-43. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2018.09.023.
29. Gabriel R, Alonso-Morán E, Calvo E, et al. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its components in Spanish adults: findings from the ENRICA study. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2021;13(1):45. doi:10.1186/s13098-021-00641-8.
30. Costa B, Barrio F, Piñol JL, Cabre JJ, Mundet X, Sagarra R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a primary care-based intervention to promote physical activity: a randomized controlled trial. Prim Care Diabetes. 2019;13(3):248-256. doi:10.1016/j.pcd.2018.10.008.
31. Salinero-Fort MA, Burgos-Lunar C, Lahoz C, et al. Prevalence of increased risk of type 2 diabetes in general practice: a cross-sectional study in Madrid (Spain). BMC Prim Care. 2023;24:100. doi:10.1186/s12875-023-02100-x.
32. Silvera Arenas SJ. Factores sociodemográficos y personales relacionados con el riesgo cardiovascular en una subpoblación de la cohorte del proyecto PREDICOL-Barranquilla [master’s thesis]. Barranquilla: Universidad del Norte; 2022. Available from: https://manglar.uninorte.edu.co/handle/10584/11473.
33. Alvarado M, et al. Incidence of childhood cancer in Latin America and the Caribbean: coverage, patterns, and time trends. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2024;48:e11. doi:10.26633/RPSP.2024.11.
34. Tuomilehto J, Lindström J, Eriksson JG, et al. Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(18):1343-1350. doi:10.1056/NEJM200105033441801.
35. Canalis AM, Berli AS, Rodriguez D, et al. Rendimiento diagnóstico del cuestionario FINDRISC para predecir diabetes mellitus tipo 2 en trabajadores municipales de Argentina. Arch Argent Endocrinol Metab. 2024;61(1):10-17. doi:10.31053/1851.1539.v61.n1.38271927.
36. World Health Organization. World Report on the Social Determinants of Equity in Health: Building a Fairer Future for All. Geneva: WHO; 2025. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240067684.
37. Juárez M, Giménez L, Rodríguez R. Evaluación del riesgo de diabetes tipo 2 mediante el test FINDRISC en una población vulnerable del norte argentino. Med Cín Soc. 2023;7(2):45-52. Available from: https://medicinaclinicaysocial.org/index.php/MCS/article/view/447.
38. Espinoza M, Pérez A, Calderón L, Aguilar C. Tamizaje de diabetes mellitus en pacientes del Hospital Mario Catarino Rivas. Rev Cientif Estud Univ Cienc Salud. 2020;8(1):7-13. Available from: https://camjol.info/index.php/RCEUCS/article/view/10943.