Skip to main content

Table 3 Care-seeking, medication and diabetic-related complications among known people with a prior diagnosis of diabetes according to gender and wealtha

From: Care-seeking and managing diabetes in rural Bangladesh: a mixed methods study

  

Receives medical advice and/or medication

Takes oral medication for diabetes

Takes Insulin for diabetes

Blood sugar tested (in the last month)

Ever used non-allopathic treatment

Experiences complications

  

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

N (%)

Crude OR (95% CI)

Adjusted ORb (95% CI)

Sex

Men

[n = 146]

128 (87.7%)

Ref

Ref

119 (81.5%)

Ref

Ref

78 (53.4%)

Ref

Ref

38 (26.0%)

Ref

Ref

17 (11.6%)

Ref

Ref

107 (73.3%)

Ref

Ref

Women

[n = 146]

124 (84.9%)

0.79 (0.41–1.55)

0.87 (0.26–2.88)

116 (79.5%)

0.88 (0.49–1.57)

1.03 (0.38–2.79)

72 (49.3%)

0.85 (0.54–1.34)

0.53 (0.23–1.22)

26 (17.1%)

0.62 (0.35–1.08)

0.95 (0.36–2.50)

10 (6.8%)

0.56 (0.25–1.30)

0.80 (0.17–3.76)

108 (74.0%)

1.04 (0.62–1.74)

1.10 (0.45–2.71)

Wealth

Most poor

[n = 52]

43 (82.7%)

Ref

Ref

43 (82.7%)

Ref

Ref

22 (51.2%)

Ref

Ref

9 (17.3%)

Ref

Ref

5 (11.6%)

Ref

Ref

40 (76.9%)

Ref

Ref

Very poor

[n = 37]

30 (81.1%)

0.90 (0.30–2.67)

0.95 (0.31–2.94)

27 (73.0%)

0.57 (0.20–1.57)

0.58 (0.20–1.68)

17 (46.0%)

1.15 (0.50–2.71)

1.42 (0.58–3.44)

4 (10.8%)

0.58 (0.16–2.05)

0.54 (0.15–2.00)

4 (13.3%)

1.14 (0.28–4.57)

0.94 (0.22–4.03)

30 (81.1%)

1.29 (0.45–3.66)

1.41 (0.48–4.15)

Poor

[n = 42]

34 (81.0%)

0.89 (0.31–2.55)

0.99 (0.32–3.06)

31 (73.8%)

0.59 (0.22–1.59)

0.64 (0.22–1.90)

18 (42.9%)

1.02 (0.45–2.32)

1.38 (0.57–3.33)

5 (11.9%)

0.65 (0.20–2.10)

0.56 (0.16–1.93)

5 (14.7%)

1.27 (0.34–4.72)

0.81 (0.20–3.31)

27 (64.3%)

0.54 (0.22–1.33)

0.68 (0.26–1.78)

Less poor

[n = 66]

59 (89.4%)

1.76 (0.61–5.11)

1.77 (0.55–5.67)

54 (81.8%)

0.94 (0.36–2.44)

0.94 (0.33–2.66)

37 (56.1%)

1.73 (0.83–3.63)

2.68 (1.17–6.15)

16 (24.2%)

1.53 (0.61–3.81)

1.30 (0.47–3.50)

7 (11.9%)

1.12 (0.33–3.74)

0.81 (0.21–3.13)

46 (69.7%)

0.69 (0.30–1.59)

0.75 (0.30–1.87)

Least poor

[n = 95]

86 (90.5%)

2.00 (0.74–5.40)

1.72 (0.55–5.39)

80 (84.2%)

1.11 (0.45–2.76)

0.96 (0.34–2.70)

56 (59.0%)

1.96 (0.99–3.89)

3.23 (1.43–7.27)

30 (31.6%)

2.21 (0.95–5.10)

1.90 (0.72–4.94)

6 (5.2%)

0.63 (0.18–2.19)

0.41 (0.10–1.73)

72 (75.8%)

0.94 (0.42–2.09)

1.06 (0.42–2.64)

Total (%)

292 (100%)

252 (86.3%)

  

235 (80.5%)

  

150 (51.3%)

  

64 (21.9%)

  

27 (9.2%)

  

215 (73.6%)

  
  1. a The table does not report on the percentage (and N values) who responded “no” or missing data. There was, however, no missing data
  2. badjusted for sociodemographic covariates (sex, wealth, age group, occupation, education, marital status, religion)