A Study of Anthropometric Profile of Diabetic and Non Diabetic Men

Nội dung text: A Study of Anthropometric Profile of Diabetic and Non Diabetic Men

1. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 9 Number 10 (2020) Journal homepage: Original Research Article A Study of Anthropometric Profile of Diabetic and Non Diabetic Men Karmjeet Kaur*, Harpreet Kaur, Kiran Bains and Jaswinder K. Brar Department of Food and Nutrition, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004 India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT A total random sample size of 387 subjects was selected in the age group of ≥20 years representing rural and urban area of Ludhiana district. The K e yw or ds anthropometric measurements were taken of all the subjects to determine if Type 2 diabetes, it can be a risk factors of type 2 diabetes. The anthropometric profile of Waist subjects revealed that the mean body weight of rural and urban diabetic circumference, Hip men was (78.85kg, 75.58 kg respectively) significantly higher (p≤ 0.01) as circumference, Body mass index compared to rural and urban non diabetic men (72.14 kg and 70.97 kg, respectively). Similarly, the waist and hip circumference of diabetic men Article Info was significantly higher (p≤ 0.01) as compared to non diabetic men. Accepted: Derived anthropometric measurements of diabetic and non diabetic subjects 17 September 2020 showed that the average BMI of rural and urban diabetic men was Available Online: 2 10 October 2020 significantly (p≤ 0.01) higher (26.82 and 26.71 kg/ m ) as compared to 2 rural and urban non diabetic men (24.64 and 24.91 kg/ m ). Introduction sub-continent countries such as Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka (Wild et al., Diabetes is a fast growing disease that will 2004 and Anjana et al., 2011). Primary results potentially lead to an epidemic in India (Joshi from a community-based study conducted by and Parikh, 2007 and Kumar, 2013). The the ICMR (Indian Council of Medical causes of diabetes in India is increasing due to research) showed that lower proportion of the factors combined with environmental north Indian population is affected by the effects such as obesity is associated with the disease (Chandigarh with 0.12 million, sedentary lifestyle, urbanization, and Jharkhand with 0.96 million people) as increased standard of living. The prevalence compared to Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu of diabetes in the rural area is one-quarter that (9.2 and 4.8 million, respectively) (Anjana et of the urban area for India and other Indian al., 2011). The suggested reason for this 2391
2. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 difference could be due to the north Indians Selection of the subjects being migrant Asians and south Indians being the host populations (Arora et al., 2010). The sampling design used for the study was 30 cluster multi-stage sampling. A total of 30 Factors responsible for diabetes mellitus may locations from Ludhiana district were selected be the sedentary lifestyle, decrease in physical targeting adult men. In the next stage of activity, increase in calorie and fat intake, sampling 12 blocks of Ludhiana district were history of gestational diabetes and stress. The selected. From each block two villages (total shift in the age of onset of the diabetes is also of 24 villages) and 6 locations from the urban observed, it has shifted to younger age area were selected in order to have a total population. As young Individuals with random sample size of 387 subjects in the age diabetes face the complications of diabetes, group ≥ 20 years, representing the rural and the economic productivity of this section of urban areas of Ludhiana. society may decline and this will affect the national economic productivity significantly Anthropometric measurements (Yesudian et al., 2014 and Sharma et al., 2016). It could have long-lasting adverse Basic anthropometric parameters such as effects on a nation’s health. Weight, height, hip circumference and waist circumference were taken using standard Though there is an increased prevalence of methods (Jelliffe, 1966) and Body Mass Index diabetes within the country but there is no (BMI) and Waist to Hip ratio (WHR) as nationwide and very few multi-centric studies derived indicators of abdominal obesity were being conducted on assessing the prevalence calculated. of diabetes mellitus and its complications. The studies which have been conducted may Derived anthropometric measurements also be prone to some potential error because Body Mass Index (BMI) of the heterogeneity of the Indian population with respect to ethnicity, culture, socio- Body mass index of the subjects was economic settings, mean that the expectation estimated using formula given by WHO of regional results may not give accurate expert consultation (2004). estimates for the entire country. There are many determinants that affect the prevalence Body mass index (kg/m2) = Weight in of diabetes in the country and to identify kilograms / (Height in meters)2 those factors is necessary to make the possible change, to bring down mortality and financial Range of BMI of Nutritional status burden over a developing country like India. Asians (kg/m2) The present study was planned with the < 18.5 Underweight objective to examine the relationship of 18.5-22.99 Normal diabetes mellitus with various anthropometric 23-24.99 Overweight parameters of diabetic and non diabetic men. 25-29.9 Pre-Obese 30 Obese Materials and Methods 30-40 Obese grade I 40.1-50 Obese grade II Location of the study >50 Obese grade III The study was carried out in 12 blocks of Ludhiana district (Punjab). 2392
3. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Waist to Hip Ratio (WHR) respectively. The average body weight of urban diabetic men was also significantly Following formula was used to calculate higher (75.58 kg) (p≤ 0.01) as compared to waist and hip ratio: urban non diabetic subjects (70.97 kg). Waist circumference Madhu (2014) has reported 77.56 kg average (cm) weight of diabetic males and Neetu (2014) Waist and hip ratio = Hip circumference has reported average weight of men to be (cm) 76.50 kg. A reference value of ≥0.90 for waist and hip Waist circumference ratio was taken for men (WHO 2008). The average waist circumference of rural Anthropometric measurements diabetic and non diabetic men ranged from ranged from 71-130 cm and 69-132cm, The anthropometric measurements of diabetic respectively. The average waist circumference and non diabetic men are given in Table 1 of rural diabetic men was (102.25 cm) (Fig. 1). significantly (p≤ 0.01) higher when compared to rural non diabetic men (96.83 cm). The Height waist circumference of urban diabetic and non diabetic men ranged from 50.8-127 cm and The average height of the rural diabetic and 71.12-124.46 cm, respectively. The average non diabetic men ranged from 155-189 cm waist circumference of urban diabetic men and 151-190cm, respectively. The average was (101 cm) significantly (p≤ 0.01) higher height of the rural diabetic and non diabetic when compared to urban non diabetic men men was found 172.08cm and 171.55 cm, (98.88 cm). Neetu (2014) has reported the respectively. The average height of the urban average waist circumference of diabetic men diabetic and non diabetic men ranged from to be 99.94. 153-189 cm and 152-188 cm, respectively. The average height of the urban diabetic and Hip circumference non diabetic men was found 170.05 cm and 171.98 cm, respectively. Neetu (2014) has The average hip circumference of rural reported 170.20 cm average height of men diabetic and non diabetic men ranged from suffering from metabolic syndrome whereas 73.66-127 cm and 63.5-124 cm, respectively. Madhu (2014) has given 167.2 cm average The average hip circumference of rural height of diabetic men. diabetic men was (101.56cm) significantly higher (p≤ 0.01) as compared to rural non Weight diabetic men (96.34 cm). The hip circumference of urban diabetic and non The average body weight of rural diabetic and diabetic men ranged from 67.31-121.92 cm non diabetic men ranged from 39.8-120 kg and 71.14-125.51 cm, respectively. The and 37-120 kg, respectively. The mean body average hip circumference of urban diabetic weight of rural diabetic men was (78.85kg) men was (100.43 cm) significantly higher (p≤ significantly (p≤ 0.01) higher as compared to 0.01) as compared to urban non diabetic men non diabetic subjects (72.14 kg). The body (97.09 cm). Hip circumference of diabetic weight of urban diabetic and non diabetic men men was reported 103.13 cm by Neetu ranged from 54-105 kg and 42- 100 kg, (2014). 2393
4. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Derived anthropometric measurements of diabetic men were in the normal weight diabetic and non diabetic men category. 10 per cent rural diabetic men and 18 per cent rural non diabetic men were Body mass index overweight. It was observed that significantly higher number (26%) of rural diabetic men The average BMI of rural diabetic and non were in obesity grade I category as compared diabetic men ranged from 14.20-43.70 kg/m2 to rural non diabetic subjects (9%) while 4 per and 13-46.60 kg/m2, respectively. The cent rural diabetic and 2 per cent non diabetic average BMI of rural diabetic men was men were in obesity grade II category. significantly (p≤ 0.01) higher (26.82 kg/m2) Among urban men, 5 per cent non diabetic as compared to rural non diabetic men (24.64 men were under weight. It was found that 28 kg/m2). The BMI of urban diabetic and non per cent urban diabetic men and 27 per cent diabetic men ranged from 18.9-43.3 kg/m2 non diabetic men were in the normal weight and 13-41.2 kg/m2, respectively. The average category while 19 per cent urban diabetic and BMI of urban diabetic men was significantly 18 per cent non diabetic men were (p≤ 0.01) higher (26.71 kg/m2) as compared overweight. It was observed that significantly to rural non diabetic men (24.91 kg/m2). The higher number (22%) of urban diabetic men average BMI 27.59 kg/m2 has been reported were in obesity grade I category as compared by Madhu (2014). to urban non diabetic subjects (7%), while 2 per cent urban diabetic and 2 per cent non Waist to hip ratio diabetic men were in obesity grade II category. The Waist hip ratio of rural diabetic and non diabetic men ranged from 0.9-1.1 and 0.81 Studies have shown that obesity has role in and 1.71, respectively. The average waist to the development of diabetes. The obesity hip ratio of rural diabetic and non diabetic progresses to diabetes by progressive defect men was 1.01. The WHR of urban diabetic in insulin secretion along with simultaneous and non diabetic men ranged from 0.8-1.1 and rise in insulin resistance (Shobha and Deepali, 0.91-1.18, respectively. The average waist to 2016). The mechanism which links obesity hip ratio of urban diabetic and non diabetic with diabetes is the adipose tissue especially men was 1.01 and 1.02, respectively. the visceral fat which is deposited in the abdomen can alter the metabolism by Body Mass Index (BMI) of rural and urban increasing the release of proinflammatory men markers, fatty acids, glycerol which decrease the sensitivity of insulin. This insulin Body mass index of men is given in Table 2 insensitivity with failure of pancreas to (Fig. 2). Higher body mass index has been release insulin constitutes the development of significantly associated with the diabetes risk. Type 2 diabetes (Kahn et al., 2006). It has The role of body mass index with the been evident that the Asian Indians are more development of diabetes has been well susceptible to risk factors like age, adiposity established which is again reinforced by the (based on BMI) and central obesity (WHR). present study. It was seen that significantly The risk of diabetes mellitus was observed to higher number of rural non diabetic men be significant for urban population with BMI (12%) were underweight as compared to rural more than 23kg/m2 (Chandalia et al., 1999). diabetic men (4%). It was found that 29 per cent rural diabetic men and 27 per cent non 2394
5. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Table.1 Anthropometric measurements of men Basic Anthropometric Rural Urban measurements Diabetic Non diabetic t-value Diabetic Non diabetic t-value (n=101) (n=172) (n=58) (n=56) Height, cm Range 155 -189 151-190 0.31NS 153-189 152-188 0.35NS Mean±SE 172.08±0.88 171.55±0.69 170.05±1.10 171.98±1.22 Weight, kg Range 39.8-120 37-120 44.70*** 54-105 42-100 18.73*** Mean±SE 78.85±1.63 72.14±1.10 75.58±1.71 70.97±1.74 Waist circumference, Range 71-130 69-132 38.85*** 50.8-127 71.12-124.46 11.69*** cm Mean±SE 102.25±1.22 96.83±1.27 101.84±1.95 98.88±1.71 Hip circumference, Range 73.66-127 63.5-124 41.90*** 67.31-121.92 71.14-125.51 14.23*** cm Mean±SE 101.56±1.08 96.34±0.83 100.43±1.58 97.09±1.56 Derived Anthropometric measurements Body Mass Index, Range 14.2-43.7 13-46.6 23.48*** 18.9-43.3 13-41.2 11.58*** 2 kg/m Mean±SE 26.82±0.63 24.64±0.41 26.71±0.76 24.91±0.62 Waist/Hip ratio Range 0.9-1.1 0.81-1.71 NA 0.8-1.1 0.91-1.18 0.53 NS Mean±SE 1.01±0.01 1.01±0.01 1.01±0.01 1.02±0.01 Values represent Mean±SE *Significant at 10%; **Significant at 5%; *** Significant at 1%; NS-Non Significant 2395
6. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Table.2 Body mass index of diabetic and non diabetic men Rural Urban BMI (kg/m2) Category Z value Z value Diabetic Non diabetic Diabetic Non diabetic (n=101) (n=172) (n=58) (n=56) <18.5 Underweight 4(4) 20(12) 2.16** - 3(5) 1.79* 18.5-22.99 Normal 29(29) 46(27) 0.35NS 16(28) 15(27) 1.71* 23-24.99 Overweight 10(10) 31(18) 1.81* 11(19) 10(18) 1.42NS 25-29.9 Pre-Obese 28(28) 56(33) 0.84NS 17(29) 23(41) 0.28NS 30 Obese - - - - - - 30-40 Grade I 26(26) 16(9) 3.63*** 13(22) 4(7) 3.92*** 40.1-50 Grade II 4(4) 3(2) 1.12NS 1(2) 1(2) 0.32NS >50 Grade III - - - - - Figures in parenthesis represent percentages. *Significant at 10% level; **Significant at 5% level; *** Significant at 1% level; NS-Non Significant 2396
7. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Diabetic Non diabetic Fig.1 Anthropometric measurements of diabetic and non diabetic men 2397
8. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Fig.2 Body mass index (BMI) of rural and urban men 2398
9. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Present study showed that diabetes mellitus Dhandhania V K, Nath L M, Das A K, prevalence was high among pre obese (28% Rao P V, Madhu S V, Shukla D K, Kaur rural and 29% urban) and obese grade I T, Priya M, Nirmal E, Parvathi S J, subjects (26% rural and 22% urban). It was Subhashini S, Subashini R, Ali M K and also evident that risk of age adjusted diabetes Mohan V (2011) Prevalence of diabetes mellitus starts to increase with the BMI in and prediabetes (impaired fasting both males and females. Also in both areas, glucose and/or impaired glucose present study showed that there was an tolerance) in urban and rural India: increasing trend of diabetes mellitus phase I results of the Indian Council of prevalence among men and women. Medical Research-INdiaDIABetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study. Diabetologia Resnick et al., (2000) observed that each kg 54: 3022-27. of weight lost annually over 10 years was Arora V, Malik J S, Khanna P, Goyal N, associated with a 33 per cent lower risk of Kumar N and Singh M (2010) diabetes in the subsequent 10 years. Prevalence of diabetes in urban Snehalatha et al., (2003) reported that Haryana. Australas Med J 3(8): 488-94. generally people get diabetes if their BMI was Chandalia M, Abate N, Garg A, Stray- between 30-31 kg/m2. Indians can develop Gundersen J and Grundy SM (1999) diabetes if their BMI is above 25 kg/m2. The Relationship between generalized and normal cut off value for BMI in Asian Indian upper body obesity to insulin resistance adults is <23 kg/m2 and waist hip ratio is in Asian Indian men. J Clin Endocrinol 0.80-0.88. Similarly, Klein et al., (2004) Metab 84(7): 2329-35. stated that the marked increase in the Jellife D B (1966) The Assessment of prevalence of overweight and obesity was Nutrition Status of the Community. responsible for the recent increase in the World Health Organisation Monograph prevalence of NIDDM. series No.53, Geneva: 50-84. Joshi S R and Parikh R M (2007) India - In conclusion, it was found that the mean diabetes capital of the world: now body weight, mean waist circumference, heading towards hypertension. J Assoc mean hip circumference and mean body mass Physicians India 55: 323-24. index (BMI) of rural and urban diabetic men Kahn S E, Hull R L and Utzschneider K M was significantly higher (p≤0.01) as compared (2006) Mechanisms linking obesity to to rural and urban non diabetic men. It insulin resistance and Type 2 Diabetes indicates that anthropometric parameters are a Mellitus. Nature 444: 840-46. modifiable risk factors of type 2 diabetes. It is Klein S, Sheard NF, Pi-Sunyer X, Daly A, indicated that people should be encouraged to Wylie-Rosett J, Kulkarni K and Clark N be physically active to maintain their body G (2004) Weight management through weight, waist/hip circumference and BMI in lifestyle modification for the prevention normal/ reference range to prevent and and management of type 2 diabetes: manage diabetes. rationale and strategies. Am J Clin Nutr 80(2): 257- 63. References Kumar A (2013) Prevalence of Glycemic Status, Obesity & Waist Circumference Anjana R M, Pradeepa R, Deepa M, Datta M, in Punjabi Type 2 Diabetics. Journal of Sudha V, Unnikrishnan R, Bhansali A, Exercise Science and Physiotherapy Joshi S R, Joshi P P, Yajnik C S, 9(1): 1-5. 2399
10. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2020) 9(10): 2391-2400 Madhu (2014) Impact of supplementation of Diabetes Mellitus. Indian J Basic and broccoli products (Brassica Oleracea L Applied Med Res 5(4): 106-10. Var Italica plenck) on blood glucose Snehalatha C, Ramachandran A, Satyavani K, and lipid profile of non insulin Sivasankari S and Vijay V (2003) dependent diabetics. Ph.D. Dissertation, Clustering of cardiovascular risk factors Punjab Agricultural University, in impaired fasting glucose and Ludhiana, India. impaired glucose tolerance. Int J Diab Neetu (2014) Development of novel functional Dev Ctries 23: 59-61. foods for metabolic syndrome. Ph.D. WHO (2004) Appropriate body mass index Dissertation, Punjab Agricultural for Asian populations and its University, Ludhiana, India. implications for policy and intervention Resnick H, Valsania P, Halter J and Lin X strategies: World Health Organization (2000) Relation of weight gain and expert consultation. Lancet 363: 157-63. weight loss on subsequent diabetes risk WHO (2008) Waist Circumference and in overweight adults. J Epidemiol Waist-Hip Ratio: Report of a WHO Community Health 54: 596-602. Expert Consultation World Health Sharma K M, Ranjani H, Zabetian A, Datta Organization, Geneva. M, Deepa M, Moses C R A, Narayan K Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R and M V, Mohan V and Ali M K (2016) King H (2004) Global prevalence of Excess cost burden of diabetes in diabetes-estimates for the year 2000 and Southern India: a clinic-based, projections for 2030. Diabetes Care comparative cost-of-illness study. Glob 27(3): 1047-53. Health Epidemiol Genom.13; 1: e8. doi: Yesudian C A, Grepstad M, Visintin E and 10.1017/gheg.2016.2. eCollection 2016. Ferrario A (2014) The economic burden Shobha M V and Deepali A (2016) Indian of diabetes in India: a review of the Diabetic Risk Score (IDRS): A novel literature. Global Health 10: 80. tool to assess the risk of Type 2 How to cite this article: Karmjeet Kaur, Harpreet Kaur, Kiran Bains and Jaswinder K. Brar. 2020. A Study of Anthropometric Profile of Diabetic and Non Diabetic Men. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 9(10): 2391-2400. doi: 2400