Circunferências medidas em diferentes locais do tronco e fatores de risco cardiometabólico
Carregando...
Data
2011-08-01
Autores
Alves, Viviane Valentim [UNESP]
Ribeiro, Luiz Fernando Paulino [UNESP]
Barros, Rosinei
Gadelha, Sandra Rocha
Santos, Stênio Carvalho
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Resumo
Os objetivos deste estudo foram comparar medidas de circunferências da cintura e abdominal e analisar suas relações com fatores de risco cardiometabólico em servidores de uma universidade da Bahia. Para tanto, cinquenta e cinco homens e setenta e uma mulheres (36,4 ± 11,2 anos) foram submetidos à avaliação antropométrica bem como medidas das pressões arteriais sistólica e diastólica, glicemia, triglicerídeos, colesterol total e frações HDL e LDL. Apesar das fortes correlações (P < 0.01) entre as diferentes medidas (r > 0,93), a circunferência da cintura foi significativamente menor que a circunferência abdominal em ambos os sexos, sendo a diferença média entre locais maior em mulheres (8,6 ± 4,1 vs 3,8 ± 4,2 cm; P < 0,01). A circunferência da cintura foi significativamente relacionada a dois e quatro fatores de risco em homens e mulheres, respectivamente. Por outro lado, a circunferência abdominal foi significativamente relacionada a um fator em homens e cinco em mulheres. Não foram observadas diferenças significativas (P > 0,05) entre coeficientes de correlação nos casos em que ambas as circunferências se relacionaram significativamente a um fator de risco. Esses resultados sugerem que o local de mensuração tem influência substancial sobre a circunferência tomada na região inferior do tronco, particularmente, em mulheres, porém, não evidenciam clara superioridade de uma das medidas quanto às relações com fatores de risco cardiometabólico tradicionais em amostra brasileira. Estudos devem ser conduzidos, buscando comparar a capacidade preditiva de diferentes medidas de circunferência para o desenvolvimento de fatores de risco e doenças cardiovasculares em diferentes populações.
The objectives of this study were to compare waist and abdominal circumference and to analyze their association with cardiometabolic risk factors in employees of a university in Bahia. Fifty-five men and 71 women (36.4 ± 11.2 years) were submitted to anthropometric assessment and measurement of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, blood glucose, triglycerides, total cholesterol, and HDL and LDL fractions. Despite strong correlations (P < 0.01) between the different measures (r > 0.93), waist circumference was significantly lower than abdominal circumference in the two genders, with the mean difference being greater in women (8.6 ± 4.1 vs 3.8 ± 4.2 cm; P < 0.01). Waist circumference was significantly associated with two and four risk factors in men and women, respectively. on the other hand, abdominal circumference was significantly associated with one risk factor in men and with five factors in women. No significant differences (P > 0.05) between correlation coefficients were observed in cases in which the two circumference measures were significantly associated with one risk factor. These results suggest that the site of measurement has substantial influence on circumference measured in the lower region of the trunk, particularly in women. However, there is no clear evidence of the superiority of a single measure in terms of the association with traditional cardiometabolic risk factors in the Brazilian sample studied. Further investigations are needed to compare the predictive capacity of different circumference measures for the development of risk factors and cardiovascular diseases in different populations.
The objectives of this study were to compare waist and abdominal circumference and to analyze their association with cardiometabolic risk factors in employees of a university in Bahia. Fifty-five men and 71 women (36.4 ± 11.2 years) were submitted to anthropometric assessment and measurement of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, blood glucose, triglycerides, total cholesterol, and HDL and LDL fractions. Despite strong correlations (P < 0.01) between the different measures (r > 0.93), waist circumference was significantly lower than abdominal circumference in the two genders, with the mean difference being greater in women (8.6 ± 4.1 vs 3.8 ± 4.2 cm; P < 0.01). Waist circumference was significantly associated with two and four risk factors in men and women, respectively. on the other hand, abdominal circumference was significantly associated with one risk factor in men and with five factors in women. No significant differences (P > 0.05) between correlation coefficients were observed in cases in which the two circumference measures were significantly associated with one risk factor. These results suggest that the site of measurement has substantial influence on circumference measured in the lower region of the trunk, particularly in women. However, there is no clear evidence of the superiority of a single measure in terms of the association with traditional cardiometabolic risk factors in the Brazilian sample studied. Further investigations are needed to compare the predictive capacity of different circumference measures for the development of risk factors and cardiovascular diseases in different populations.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Antropometria, Obesidade central, Fatores de risco, Anthropometry, Central obesity, Risk factors
Como citar
Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria & Desempenho Humano. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, v. 13, n. 4, p. 250-256, 2011.