Transparency is extremely important to us, so we are letting you know that we may receive a commission on some of links you click on from this page. See our disclaimer.

National Diabetes Month may have ended yesterday, but our reporting on this important workplace wellness issue hasn't.

As the American Diabetes Association has suggested using “impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose with the lower cut points” as an avenue to define prediabetes, according to MedPage, researchers found  “identified more individuals at increased risk for cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality than other definitions of prediabetes.”

In an online report for the British publication BMJ, researchers found that “while prediabetes has been consistently defined as impaired glucose tolerance at 7.8-11.0 mmol/L, researchers noted an increased risk of composite cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease at the debated lower cut points of 5.6 mmol/L for impaired fasting glucose and 39 mmol/mol for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c),” MedPage reports.

The researchers wrote: “These results support the lower cutoff point for impaired fasting glucose according to ADA criteria, as well as the incorporation of HbA1c in defining prediabetes. More prospective cohort studies that evaluate the level of HbA1c and health risks are needed.”

They further note: “These results suggest that impaired glucose tolerance is a stronger risk factor for all cause mortality, but not for cardiovascular disease, than other definitions of prediabetes, which might be caused by the significant association between impaired glucose tolerance and non-cardiovascular death, especially cancer mortality.”

In other words: The study supports the ADA's view of prediabetes — providing even more reason why a well-run workplace wellness plan should address diabetes prevention & management.

MedPage makes an important note of clarification: “The prediabetes debate swirls around concerns that the lower cut points identified by the American Diabetes Association may create a needless epidemic of prediabetes diagnoses and preventive efforts with no real evidence of benefits. Conflicting, or at least inconsistent data linking prediabetes defined as IFG-ADA with complications such as all cause mortality and cardiovascular events is at the root of the issue. As a result, it has yet to be adopted by other international guidelines for diabetes management, researchers explained.”

The U.S. National Institutes of Health offers a range of information to help manage diabetes.