@article{article_527970, title={Alternative Measurements to Waist Circumference in Diabetic Obese Females}, journal={Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care}, volume={13}, pages={22–27}, year={2019}, DOI={10.21763/tjfmpc.527970}, author={Tuzun, Sabah and Öner, Can and Akman, Mehmet and Ölmez, Burak and Dabak, Reşat and Orbay, Ekrem}, keywords={Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus,Anthropometry,Waist Circumference,Body Mass Index}, abstract={<p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:9pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us"> </span> </b> </p> <p> <b>  </b> </p> <b> </b> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Introduction: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
Although waist circumference measurement is frequently used for the assessment
of abdominal fat mass, this method has some limitations. Among alternative
anthropometric measurements, neck circumference is effective in reflecting the
upper body fat distribution, whereas arm circumference is effective in
reflecting insulin resistance. The present study aimed to evaluate the
relationship between waist circumference and neck and arm circumferences in
obese female patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Method: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
Diabetic female patients, who visited the Diabetes Outpatient Clinic between
April and June 2015 and had a body mass index (BMI) of ≥ 30 kg/m <sup>2 </sup>,
were enrolled in the study. Anthropometric measurements included body weight,
height, BMI, waist circumference, neck circumference and both arm circumference
in all participants. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Results: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
A total of 285 participants were included in the study; arm circumference was
measured in 284 (99.65%) and neck circumference was measured in 227 (79.65%).
Overall mean BMI was 37.4±5.6 kg/m <sup>2 </sup>, mean waist circumference was
117.8±12.1 cm, mean neck circumference was 39.6±3.5 cm, and mean arm
circumference was 35.7±4.9 cm. After adjusting for age and duration of DM,
waist circumference showed strong positive correlation with BMI but moderately
positive significant correlation with neck circumference and arm circumference
(p<0.001, p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). Stepwise regression
analysis, which was performed with the independent variables BMI, neck circumference
and arm circumference for the dependent variable waist circumference, indicated
that BMI (R <sup>2 </sup>=0.544 and p<0.001), BMI and neck circumference (R <sup>2 </sup>=0.599
and p<0.001) are significant. However, there was no significant relationship
between waist circumference and arm circumference (p>0.05). </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Conclusion: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
Waist circumference showed strong positive correlation with BMI but moderately
positive correlation with neck and arm circumferences. Among anthropometric
measurements, BMI has the highest efficacy in estimating waist circumference,
whereas neck circumference has lower efficacy. Moreover, arm circumference has
no significant effect in estimating waist circumference. </span> </p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us"> <br /> </span> </p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">  </span> </p> <p> </p> <b style="font-size:.9em;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Giriş: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
Abdominal yağ kitlesinin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla sıklıkla bel çevresi ölçümü
kullanılmakla beraber, bel çevresi ölçümü ile ilgili kısıtlılıklar mevcuttur.
Alternatif antropometrik ölçümlerden boyun çevresinin üst vücut yağ dağılımını
gösterdiği ve kol çevresinin insulin direncini göstermede etkili olduğu
saptanmıştır. Bu çalışma tip 2 diyabet hastası olan obez ve morbid obez
kadınlarda bel çevresi ile boyun ve kol çevresi arasındaki ilişkinin
değerlendirilmesini amaçlamaktadır. </span> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;"> <b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Yöntem: </span> </b> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:8pt;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">
Çalışmaya Diyabet Merkezi’ne Nisan – Haziran}, number={1}, publisher={Aile Hekimliği Akademisi Derneği}