Prevalence and risk factors of painful diabetic neuropathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Review articlepeer-review

    15 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Painful diabetes-related peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a common and debilitating complication of diabetes, contributing significantly to morbidity and healthcare costs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to determine the global prevalence of PDPN among individuals with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and to identify associated risk factors. A comprehensive search of four English and three Chinese databases was conducted for observational studies on PDPN prevalence up to June 22, 2024. Of the 41 studies included, the pooled global prevalence of PDPN was 46.7 % (95 % CI, 41.8–51.7). In subgroup analysis, significant statistical differences were observed in prevalence estimates between different diagnostic methods for neuropathic pain, with neuropathic-specific pain scales indicating higher rates (P = 0.03). Studies with mean diabetes duration of less than 10 years or more than 15 years reported higher prevalence (P < 0.01). Significant risk factors for PDPN included older age (OR = 1.02, 95 % CI, 1.01–1.04), female gender (OR = 1.58, 95 % CI, 1.19–2.11), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (OR = 1.62, 95 % CI, 1.43–1.83), longer diabetes duration (OR = 1.05, 95 % CI, 1.01–1.08), and nephropathy (OR = 1.32, 95 % CI, 1.24–1.40). Targeted screening and standardized diagnostic tools are urgently needed to enhance PDPN management and mitigate its burden globally.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article number112099
    JournalDiabetes Research and Clinical Practice
    Volume222
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Apr 2025

    Keywords

    • Diabetes mellitus
    • Diabetes-related peripheral neuropathy
    • Meta-analysis
    • Neuropathic pain
    • Systematic review

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Prevalence and risk factors of painful diabetic neuropathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this