H M M Herath, N P Weerasinghe, T P Weerarathna, A Amarathunga
{"title":"使用WHO、NCEP-ATP III和IDF定义比较斯里兰卡2型糖尿病患者代谢综合征患病率","authors":"H M M Herath, N P Weerasinghe, T P Weerarathna, A Amarathunga","doi":"10.1155/2018/7813537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM) increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, recognition of MetS in type 2 DM is important in initiating the appropriate preventive and therapeutic measures. The commonly used definitions have similarities and discrepancies. Aims of this study was to investigate the prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2DM using all three well known (WHO, IDF, and NCEP-ATP III) definitions and to identify the concordance and the difference of these three definitions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included patients with type 2 DM who were followed up at the regional diabetes centre in Galle, Sri Lanka. A total of 2913 type 2 DM patients were recruited by convenient sampling method, and their clinical and biochemical data were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age (SD) of the sample was 49.9 (10.2) years and the mean duration of diabetes was 5.04 (5.71). Prevalence of MetS was highest by WHO (70%) followed by IDF (44%) and NCEP-ATP III (29%) definitions. The prevalence was significantly higher in women according to all three definitions, and the difference was most marked with NCEP-ATP III and IDF definitions. Around 25% were identified as having MetS by all three definitions whereas around 45% were recognized with MetS by two definitions. While concordances between WHO with IDF (0.37, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and NCEP-ATP III (0.24, <i>p</i> < 0.001) criteria were poor, they were average (0.53, <i>p</i> < 0.001) between NCEP-ATP III and IDF criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2 DM can significantly be varied based on the definition used and the three definitions of MetS recognized different set of individuals. The highest prevalence of MetS was observed with WHO (70.6%) whereas lowest was observed with NCEP-ATP III definition.</p>","PeriodicalId":13831,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chronic Diseases","volume":"2018 ","pages":"7813537"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2018/7813537","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of the Prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome among Sri Lankan Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using WHO, NCEP-ATP III, and IDF Definitions.\",\"authors\":\"H M M Herath, N P Weerasinghe, T P Weerarathna, A Amarathunga\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2018/7813537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM) increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, recognition of MetS in type 2 DM is important in initiating the appropriate preventive and therapeutic measures. The commonly used definitions have similarities and discrepancies. Aims of this study was to investigate the prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2DM using all three well known (WHO, IDF, and NCEP-ATP III) definitions and to identify the concordance and the difference of these three definitions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included patients with type 2 DM who were followed up at the regional diabetes centre in Galle, Sri Lanka. A total of 2913 type 2 DM patients were recruited by convenient sampling method, and their clinical and biochemical data were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age (SD) of the sample was 49.9 (10.2) years and the mean duration of diabetes was 5.04 (5.71). Prevalence of MetS was highest by WHO (70%) followed by IDF (44%) and NCEP-ATP III (29%) definitions. The prevalence was significantly higher in women according to all three definitions, and the difference was most marked with NCEP-ATP III and IDF definitions. Around 25% were identified as having MetS by all three definitions whereas around 45% were recognized with MetS by two definitions. While concordances between WHO with IDF (0.37, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and NCEP-ATP III (0.24, <i>p</i> < 0.001) criteria were poor, they were average (0.53, <i>p</i> < 0.001) between NCEP-ATP III and IDF criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2 DM can significantly be varied based on the definition used and the three definitions of MetS recognized different set of individuals. The highest prevalence of MetS was observed with WHO (70.6%) whereas lowest was observed with NCEP-ATP III definition.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Chronic Diseases\",\"volume\":\"2018 \",\"pages\":\"7813537\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2018/7813537\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Chronic Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7813537\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Chronic Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7813537","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22
摘要
背景:2型糖尿病(type 2 DM)患者代谢综合征(MetS)的存在增加了心血管疾病发病率和死亡率的风险。因此,在2型糖尿病中识别MetS对于启动适当的预防和治疗措施是重要的。常用的定义既有相似之处,也有差异。本研究的目的是使用所有三种众所周知的定义(WHO、IDF和NCEP-ATP III)来调查2型dm患者中MetS的患病率,并确定这三种定义的一致性和差异。方法:这项横断面研究纳入了在斯里兰卡加勒地区糖尿病中心随访的2型糖尿病患者。采用方便抽样法,共招募2913例2型糖尿病患者,收集其临床及生化资料。结果:样本的平均年龄(SD)为49.9(10.2)岁,平均糖尿病病程为5.04(5.71)岁。WHO定义的met患病率最高(70%),其次是IDF(44%)和NCEP-ATP III(29%)。根据所有三种定义,女性的患病率明显更高,其中NCEP-ATP III和IDF定义的差异最为明显。约25%的人被所有三种定义认定为患有MetS,而约45%的人被两种定义认定为患有MetS。虽然WHO与IDF (0.37, p < 0.001)和NCEP-ATP III (0.24, p < 0.001)标准的一致性较差,但NCEP-ATP III与IDF标准的一致性为平均(0.53,p < 0.001)。结论:根据所使用的定义和三种定义所识别的不同个体,2型糖尿病患者中MetS的患病率可能存在显著差异。WHO定义的met患病率最高(70.6%),而NCEP-ATP III定义的met患病率最低。
A Comparison of the Prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome among Sri Lankan Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using WHO, NCEP-ATP III, and IDF Definitions.
Background: Presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM) increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, recognition of MetS in type 2 DM is important in initiating the appropriate preventive and therapeutic measures. The commonly used definitions have similarities and discrepancies. Aims of this study was to investigate the prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2DM using all three well known (WHO, IDF, and NCEP-ATP III) definitions and to identify the concordance and the difference of these three definitions.
Methods: This cross-sectional study included patients with type 2 DM who were followed up at the regional diabetes centre in Galle, Sri Lanka. A total of 2913 type 2 DM patients were recruited by convenient sampling method, and their clinical and biochemical data were collected.
Results: The mean age (SD) of the sample was 49.9 (10.2) years and the mean duration of diabetes was 5.04 (5.71). Prevalence of MetS was highest by WHO (70%) followed by IDF (44%) and NCEP-ATP III (29%) definitions. The prevalence was significantly higher in women according to all three definitions, and the difference was most marked with NCEP-ATP III and IDF definitions. Around 25% were identified as having MetS by all three definitions whereas around 45% were recognized with MetS by two definitions. While concordances between WHO with IDF (0.37, p < 0.001) and NCEP-ATP III (0.24, p < 0.001) criteria were poor, they were average (0.53, p < 0.001) between NCEP-ATP III and IDF criteria.
Conclusions: The prevalence of MetS among patients with type 2 DM can significantly be varied based on the definition used and the three definitions of MetS recognized different set of individuals. The highest prevalence of MetS was observed with WHO (70.6%) whereas lowest was observed with NCEP-ATP III definition.