Premium
Prevalence of risk factors for cardiovascular disease and their relationship with waist circumference in healthy, young adults
Author(s) -
Houston A.M.,
Barnes M.S.,
Horigan G.,
Wallace J.M.W.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of human nutrition and dietetics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.951
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1365-277X
pISSN - 0952-3871
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-277x.2009.00952_15.x
Subject(s) - medicine , waist , bioelectrical impedance analysis , anthropometry , body mass index , circumference , body fat percentage , waist to height ratio , metabolic syndrome , physical therapy , demography , obesity , geometry , mathematics , sociology
Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the primary cause of mortality in the UK and body fat is one of the main modifiable risk factors which predisposes individuals to CVD (Grundy et al ., 1999). However few studies have focused on assessing risk markers in younger adults. The aim of this study was to determine body composition and associated risk factors for CVD in a randomly selected sample of healthy young adults. Methods: One hundred and twelve self‐reported healthy men and women aged 20–40 years were recruited to the study. Body composition was measured using body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist‐to‐height ratio (WHTR), sum of skinfolds, and percentage body fat (%BF) as measured by air displacement plethysmography (using BodPod ® , Life Measurement Inc., Concord, CA, USA), dual energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (using prediction equations from Tanita ® , Tanita UK Ltd, Yiewsley, Middlesex, UK). A fasting blood sample was collected and lipid profiles and high sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hs‐CRP) concentration were measured using commercially available kits (Instrumentation Laboratory) on the ILab 600 Chemistry Systems autoanalyser. Independent samples t test (or Mann–Whitney U‐ test, where appropriate) and correlation analysis were performed. 1 Results for male and female subjects, and according to Waist Action Level 1 (WAL 1)Anthropometry Male (n = 55) Female (n = 57) WAL 1 (n = 54)‡ & Biochemistry Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SDBMI (kg m −2 ) 27.13 3.81 25.61 5.15 23.55 2.68 29.38*** 4.29 WC (cm) 91.67 9.58 83.66*** 12.27 – – – – WHTR 0.52 0.06 0.50 0.07 – – – Sum of skinfolds 5.78 2.33 7.41** 3.38 5.21 2.21 8.12*** 3.05 BodPod ® (% BF) 22.65 8.85 32.86*** 9.44 21.13 7.37 35.06*** 8.26 DXA (% BF) 24.84 7.63 36.57*** 8.02 25.22 7.92 36.81*** 7.86 Tanita ® (% BF)† 22.54 6.09 32.36*** 8.26 22.12 5.85 33.55*** 7.46 TC (mmol/l) 4.78 1.09 4.53 0.97 4.44 0.94 4.89* 1.08 HDL‐C (mmol L −1 ) 1.25 0.33 1.47*** 0.3 1.45 0.35 1.26** 0.28 LDL‐C (mmol L −1 ) 2.98 0.93 2.59* 0.89 2.57 0.84 3.01* 0.96 LDL‐C: HDL‐C ratio 2.53 1.03 1.84*** 0.74 1.87 0.76 2.51*** 1.04 Triacylglycerol (mmol L −1 ) 1.22 0.68 1.05 0.48 0.92 0.37 1.37*** 0.69 hs‐CRP (mg L −1 )‡ 0.90 1.66 1.20* 2.35 0.90 1.57 1.40* 2.422 Age‐adjusted correlation analysis of the relationship between mean WC and biochemical CVD risk factorsCorrelation variable R value P valueTC (mmol L −1 ) 0.110 0.250 LDL‐C (mmol L −1 ) 0.187* 0.050 HDL‐C (mmol L −1 ) −0.446*** <0.000 LDL‐C:HDL‐C ratio 0.393*** <0.000 Triacylglycerol (mmol L −1 ) 0.357*** <0.000 hs‐CRP (mg L −1 )†† 0.167 0.079Values presented as mean and standard deviation; WAL 1: WC of 94cm (male) or 80cm (female); Mean values significantly different from the male subjects/