Evaluation of glycemic index determination method

R. Listyaningrum
{"title":"Evaluation of glycemic index determination method","authors":"R. Listyaningrum","doi":"10.12928/pharmaciana.v11i2.20666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Indonesia, determination of glycemic index (GI) was performed according to approved protocols prescribed by FAO (1998) and BPOM (2011); but, remarkable differences among these methods exist, primarily regarding the points of recommendation. This present work aimed to evaluate the technical steps of the protocol for determining GI between two protocols recommended by BPOM (2011) and FAO (1998). Ten healthy subjects (age 21-36 years old and body mass index (BMI) 18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ) were recruited for the study. The blood glucose was measured with repeated glucose trials, while the number of sampling points for the blood glucose test was also investigated. The range of GI for rice, wheat cookies, NS-cookies, HMT-cookies were 68–77; 55– 60; 35 – 43; 35– 41, respectively, using the combination of three different aspects between FAO and BPOM protocol. Noticeably, the difference in glucose trials did not cause significant variations to GI (n=10, p>0.05). Regarding statistical performance between methods, the Coefficient of Variance (CV) resulted from BPOM protocol (10 subjects, 5 sampling points) ranged 37 to 49%, being slightly higher compared to CV obtained from FAO protocol (7 subjects with triplicate glucose trials, 7 sampling points), i.e., 33% and 35%. The conclusive remark was noticed, that the most satisfying protocol for determination of GI was achieved using no less than two reference food trials, seven subjects, and seven blood sampling points.","PeriodicalId":20051,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaciana","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaciana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12928/pharmaciana.v11i2.20666","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Indonesia, determination of glycemic index (GI) was performed according to approved protocols prescribed by FAO (1998) and BPOM (2011); but, remarkable differences among these methods exist, primarily regarding the points of recommendation. This present work aimed to evaluate the technical steps of the protocol for determining GI between two protocols recommended by BPOM (2011) and FAO (1998). Ten healthy subjects (age 21-36 years old and body mass index (BMI) 18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ) were recruited for the study. The blood glucose was measured with repeated glucose trials, while the number of sampling points for the blood glucose test was also investigated. The range of GI for rice, wheat cookies, NS-cookies, HMT-cookies were 68–77; 55– 60; 35 – 43; 35– 41, respectively, using the combination of three different aspects between FAO and BPOM protocol. Noticeably, the difference in glucose trials did not cause significant variations to GI (n=10, p>0.05). Regarding statistical performance between methods, the Coefficient of Variance (CV) resulted from BPOM protocol (10 subjects, 5 sampling points) ranged 37 to 49%, being slightly higher compared to CV obtained from FAO protocol (7 subjects with triplicate glucose trials, 7 sampling points), i.e., 33% and 35%. The conclusive remark was noticed, that the most satisfying protocol for determination of GI was achieved using no less than two reference food trials, seven subjects, and seven blood sampling points.
评价血糖指数测定方法
在印度尼西亚,血糖指数(GI)的测定是根据FAO(1998)和BPOM(2011)规定的批准方案进行的;但是,这些方法之间存在显著差异,主要是在推荐点方面。本工作旨在评估BPOM(2011年)和FAO(1998年)建议的两个协议之间确定GI的协议的技术步骤。本研究招募了10名健康受试者(年龄21-36岁,体重指数18.5-24.9 kg/m2)。通过重复血糖试验测量血糖,同时还调查了血糖测试的采样点数量。大米、小麦饼干、NS饼干、HMT饼干的GI范围为68–77;55-60;35-43;35-41,使用粮农组织和《生物多样性公约》议定书之间三个不同方面的组合。值得注意的是,葡萄糖试验的差异并没有导致GI的显著变化(n=10,p>0.05)。关于方法之间的统计性能,BPOM方案(10名受试者,5个采样点)得出的方差系数(CV)在37%至49%之间,与FAO方案(7名受试人进行三份葡萄糖试验,7个采样点。,33%和35%。值得注意的是,结论性意见是,使用不少于两次参考食品试验、七名受试者和七个血液采样点,实现了最令人满意的GI测定方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信