The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India · 2009
Clinical profile of persons with family history of diabetes mellitus with special reference to body fat percentage.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mahanta B N, Mahanta T G
Аннотация
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To measure total body fat percentage of persons with evident family history of diabetes mellitus; to assess the BMI and other risk factors of persons at risk of developing diabetes mellitus; and to compare the body fat percentage between first degree relatives of diabetics and nondiabetic patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Total 140 subjects, first degree relatives of diabetic patients and similar number of age and sex matched control were selected from first degree relatives of non-diabetic patients. Detailed clinical, systematic anthropometric evaluation and calculation of BMI and blood sugar and other relevant laboratory investigations were done. Body fat percentages were calculated using bioimpedance method using fat monitor.
RESULTS: Average percentage of body fat was 32 percent. fifty-two percent subjects were overweight (BMI 25--<30). It was proved statistically that hypertension was 4.5 times higher in cases than in the control group (95% CI--2.57-7.91, p < 0.005). In case of obesity the differences between case and control were not significant (OR--2.09, 95% CI--0.61-7.24, p > 0.05). BMI was four times higher in cases than control groups (95% CI--2.49-7.20, p < 0.001). During the study the newly detected diabetes was significantly higher amongst cases than control (OR--25.52, 95% CI--15.42-42.59, p < 0.001). Body fat percentage was 3.88 times higher in cases than control group. The difference of body fat percentage was statistically significant (95% CI--2.35-6.43, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Body fat percentage monitoring could be a useful tool for assessing the potential diabetics, particularly for high risk screening and it might prove as an important tool for evidence based monitoring of lifestyle modification approaches for health promotion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Total 140 subjects, first degree relatives of diabetic patients and similar number of age and sex matched control were selected from first degree relatives of non-diabetic patients. Detailed clinical, systematic anthropometric evaluation and calculation of BMI and blood sugar and other relevant laboratory investigations were done. Body fat percentages were calculated using bioimpedance method using fat monitor.
RESULTS: Average percentage of body fat was 32 percent. fifty-two percent subjects were overweight (BMI 25--<30). It was proved statistically that hypertension was 4.5 times higher in cases than in the control group (95% CI--2.57-7.91, p < 0.005). In case of obesity the differences between case and control were not significant (OR--2.09, 95% CI--0.61-7.24, p > 0.05). BMI was four times higher in cases than control groups (95% CI--2.49-7.20, p < 0.001). During the study the newly detected diabetes was significantly higher amongst cases than control (OR--25.52, 95% CI--15.42-42.59, p < 0.001). Body fat percentage was 3.88 times higher in cases than control group. The difference of body fat percentage was statistically significant (95% CI--2.35-6.43, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Body fat percentage monitoring could be a useful tool for assessing the potential diabetics, particularly for high risk screening and it might prove as an important tool for evidence based monitoring of lifestyle modification approaches for health promotion.