Vijay Viswanathan
St. John's Medical College
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Vijay Viswanathan.
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice | 1997
Chamukuttan Snehalatha; Vijay Viswanathan; Moopil Viswanathan; Steven M. Haffner
Epidemiological data from Asian Indians from Madras (AI) and Mexican Americans (MA) and non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) from San Antonio heart study were compared to determine the possible contributions by the anthropometric measurements to the varied prevalence of noninsulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) in these ethnic groups. MA had the highest rate of obesity (mean body mass index (BMI) 28.9 +/- 5.9 kg/m2) and the highest prevalence of diabetes (men 19.6%; women 11.8%, P < 0.001 vs other groups). NHW although had high rates of obesity (mean BMI 26.2 +/- 5.2 kg/m2) had low prevalence of diabetes (men 4.4%; women 5.7%) than the AI (men 9.9%; women 5.7%) (Mean BMI 22.3 +/- 4.4 kg/m2, P < 0.001). Although AI had lower BMI than MA, the risk conferred by BMI was similarly high in AI and MA and both the ethnic groups had higher risks than NHW. Impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) was also more prevalent in MA than in AI (men, MA vs AI, 11.8 vs 7.5%, P < 0.003; women 16.1 vs 5.5%, P < 0.001). NHW had lower prevalence of IGT in men (5.7%) and women (6.3%) which were significantly lower (P < 0.001) compared to MA only. Age and BMI were predictive factors of NIDDM in all, while waist to hip ratio (WHR) was significant only in AI and MA, although NHW had high WHR. This may be an indicator of differences in genetic susceptibility. This study also highlights the similarity in risk factors between AI and MA living in urban environment and the significance of distribution of adiposity in the comparatively lean AI.
Diabetes Care | 2007
Chamukuttan Snehalatha; Christina Augustine; Narayanasamy Murugesan; Vijay Viswanathan; Anil Kapur; Rhys Williams
OBJECTIVE— This study aimed to assess the direct cost incurred by diabetic subjects who were in different income groups in urban and rural India, as well as to examine the changing trends of costs in the urban setting from 1998 to 2005. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS— A total of 556 diabetic subjects from various urban and rural regions of seven Indian states were enrolled. A brief uniform coded questionnaire (24 items) on direct cost was used. RESULTS— Annual family income was higher in urban subjects (rupees [Rs] 100,000 or
PLOS ONE | 2012
Vijay Viswanathan; Satyavani Kumpatla; Vigneswari Aravindalochanan; Rajeswari Rajan; C. Chinnasamy; Rajan Srinivasan; Jerard Maria Selvam; Anil Kapur
2,273) than in the rural subjects (Rs 36,000 or
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice | 2010
Shabana Tharkar; Arutselvi Devarajan; Satyavani Kumpatla; Vijay Viswanathan
818) (P < 0.001). Total median expenditure on health care was Rs 10,000 (
American Journal of Cardiology | 2001
Immaneni Sathyamurthy; Chamukuttan Snehalatha; K Satyavani; S Sivasankari; Jaya Misra; Maligail R Girinath; Vijay Viswanathan
227) in urban and Rs 6,260 (
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice | 2003
Vijay Viswanathan; Chamukuttan Snehalatha; M Sivagami; Rajasekar Seena
142) in rural (P < 0.001) subjects. Treatment costs increased with duration of diabetes, presence of complications, hospitalization, surgery, insulin therapy, and urban setting. Lower-income groups spent a higher proportion of their income on diabetes care (urban poor 34% and rural poor 27%). After accounting for inflation, a secular increase of 113% was observed in the total expenses between 1998 and 2005 in the urban population. The highest increase in percentage of household income devoted to diabetes care was in the lowest economic group (34% of income in 1998 vs. 24.5% in 2005) (P < 0.01). There was a significant improvement in urban subjects in medical reimbursement from 2% (1998) to 21.3% (2005). CONCLUSIONS— Urban and rural diabetic subjects spend a large percentage of income on diabetes management. The economic burden on urban families in developing countries is rising, and the total direct cost has doubled from 1998 to 2005.
Current Medical Research and Opinion | 2014
Anil Pareek; Nitin Chandurkar; Nihal Thomas; Vijay Viswanathan; Alaka Deshpande; O.P. Gupta; Asha Shah; Arjun Kakrani; Sudhir Bhandari; N.K. Thulasidharan; Banshi Saboo; Shashidhar Devaramani; N.B. Vijaykumar; Shrikant Sharma; Navneet Agrawal; M. Mahesh; Kunal Kothari
Background Diabetes mellitus (DM) is recognised as an important risk factor to tuberculosis (TB). India has high TB burden, along with rising DM prevalence. There are inadequate data on prevalence of DM and pre-diabetes among TB cases in India. Aim was to determine diabetes prevalence among a cohort of TB cases registered under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program in selected TB units in Tamil Nadu, India, and assess pattern of diabetes management amongst known cases. Methods 827 among the eligible patients (n = 904) underwent HbA1c and anthropometric measurements. OGTT was done for patients without previous history of DM and diagnosis was based on WHO criteria. Details of current treatment regimen of TB and DM and DM complications, if any, were recorded. A pretested questionnaire was used to collect information on sociodemographics, habitual risk factors, and type of TB. Findings DM prevalence was 25.3% (95% CI 22.6–28.5) and that of pre-diabetes 24.5% (95% CI 20.4–27.6). Risk factors associated with DM among TB patients were age (31–35, 36–40, 41–45, 46–50, >50 years vs <30 years) [OR (95% CI) 6.75 (2.36–19.3); 10.46 (3.95–27.7); 18.63 (6.58–52.7); 11.05 (4.31–28.4); 24.7 (9.73–62.7) (p<0.001)], positive family history of DM [3.08 (1.73–5.5) (p<0.001)], sedentary occupation [1.69 (1.10–2.59) (p = 0.016)], and BMI (18.5–22.9, 23–24.9 and ≥25 kg/m2 vs <18.5 kg/m2) [2.03 (1.32–3.12) (p = 0.001); 0.87 (0.31–2.43) (p = 0.78); 1.44 (0.54–3.8) (p = 0.47)]; for pre-diabetes, risk factors were age (36–40, 41–45, 46–50, >50 years vs <30 years) [2.24 (1.1–4.55) (p = 0.026); 6.96 (3.3–14.7); 3.44 (1.83–6.48); 4.3 (2.25–8.2) (p<0.001)], waist circumference [<90 vs. ≥90 cm (men), <80 vs. ≥80 cm (women)] [3.05 (1.35–6.9) (p = 0.007)], smoking [1.92 (1.12–3.28) (p = 0.017)] and monthly income (5000–10,000 INR vs <5000 INR) [0.59 (0.37–0.94) (p = 0.026)]. DM risk was higher among pulmonary TB [3.06 (1.69–5.52) (p<0.001)], especially sputum positive, than non-pulmonary TB. Interpretation Nearly 50% of TB patients had either diabetes or pre-diabetes.
Journal of Diabetes and Its Complications | 2014
Vijay Viswanathan; A. Vigneswari; K. Selvan; K Satyavani; R. Rajeswari; Anil Kapur
OBJECTIVE To assess the annual health care expenditure for a patient with diabetes and extrapolate the same to country specific prevalence estimates for 2010. METHODS This population based, cost of illness study collected retrospective data for last 12 months on direct costs (medical and non-medical) through records, indirect cost through human capital approach and intangible cost by contingent valuation method from diabetes patients. RESULTS Out of 4677 subjects screened, 1050 had diabetes and 718 participated in the survey. The median annual direct and indirect cost associated with diabetes care was estimated at 25,391 INR (
The Open Obesity Journal | 2009
Shabana Tharkar; Vijay Viswanathan
525.5) and 4970 INR (
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice | 1997
Moopil Viswanathan; Chamukuttan Snehalatha; Vijay Viswanathan; P. Vidyavathi; J. Indu
102.8), respectively. Extrapolating the direct and indirect estimates to Indian population, the annual costs for diabetes would be 1541.4 billion INR (