Please wait a minute...
文章检索
预防医学  2017, Vol. 29 Issue (12): 1193-1198    DOI: 10.19485/j.cnki.issn1007-0931.2017.12.002
  论著 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
农村代谢综合征患者强化生活方式干预效果评价
喻森海1,潘飞霞2,顾杭杰1,瞿琼1,翟利君1,郭灿安1,徐春晓3,周丹2,杨敏4,朱益民2
1.杭州市萧山区戴村镇社区卫生服务中心,浙江 杭州 311261;
2.浙江大学公共卫生学院;
3.浙江省疾病预防控制中心;
4.浙江大学医学营养学与食品卫生研究所
Effectiveness evaluation of intensive lifestyle intervention on rural residents with metabolic syndrome
YU Sen-hai,PAN Fei-xia,GU Hang-jie,QU Qiong,ZHAI Li-jun,GUO Can-an,XU Chun-xiao,ZHOU Dan,YANG Min,ZHU Yi-min
Xiao Shan District Dai Village Community Health Service Center,Hangzhou,Zhejiang,311261,China
全文: PDF(614 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 目的 评价强化生活方式对农村代谢综合征(MS)患者的干预效果。方法 从MS横断面调查研究中纳入253例MS患者,不完全随机分成干预组(182例)和常规管理组(71例)。干预组采用合理膳食、规律运动及健康教育为重点的强化生活方式进行干预;常规管理组按慢性病管理工作规范和程序进行管理。干预6个月后比较干预前后MS患者体格指标及代谢相关生化指标差异。结果 两组MS患者体格指标和代谢相关生化指标基线水平差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。干预6个月后,干预组和常规管理组MS患病率分别为67.14%和60.95%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。干预组体重、BMI、腰围分别下降3.11 kg、1.50 kg/m2、4.29 cm,常规管理组分别下降1.23 kg、0.47 kg/m2、1.22 cm,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。干预组尿酸(UA)、三酰甘油(TG)分别减少14.30 μmol/L、0.01 mmol/L,常规管理组分别增加18.17 μmol/L、0.41 mmol/L,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预组高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)增加0.02 mmol/L,常规管理组减少0.10 mmol/L,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。干预组中高依从性组体重、BMI分别减少3.93 kg、1.40 kg/m2,低依从性组分别减少2.80 kg、1.00 kg/m2;高依从性组体脂率(BF%)减少2.27%,低依从性组增加1.01%,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 强化生活方式干预可有效改善农村居民MS代谢组分异常状况。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
喻森海
潘飞霞
顾杭杰
瞿琼
翟利君
郭灿安
徐春晓
周丹
杨敏
朱益民
关键词 代谢综合征生活方式依从性    
AbstractObjective To evaluate the effectiveness of intensive lifestyle intervention on rural residents with metabolic syndrome (MS). Methods A total of 253 patients with MS selected from cross-sectional survey were divided into intensive lifestyle intervention and conventional management group incomplete randomly. Aimed to control weight,patients in the intervention group were treated with dietary control and exercise guidance. Besides,their compliances were assessed. In conventional management group,patients were disposed according to chronic disease management specification. Anthropometric measurements and biochemical markers detection were carried out in both groups at baseline and at the end of 6 months. Results These main anthropometric measurements and biochemical markers have no significant difference between the intervention group and conventional management group at the baseline (P>0.05). After 6 months intensive lifestyle modification,the prevalence of MS did not significantly differ between the two groups:it was 67.14% in the intervention group and 60.95% in the conventional management group(P>0.05).In the intervention group,the body weight,BMI and the waist circumference were decreased by 3.11 kg,1.50 kg/m2,4.29 cm,respectively,and 1.23 kg,0.47 kg/m2,1.22 cm in the conventional management group. The changes were significantly larger in the intervention group than in the conventional management group (P<0.01).Uric acid,triglyceride were decreased by 14.30 μmol/L,0.01 mmol/L,respectively,in the intervention group and in the conventional management group they were increased by 18.17 μmol/L and 0.41 mmol/L conversely. While the high density lipoprotein cholesterol was increased by 0.02 mmol/L,it was decreased by 0.10 mmol/L in the conventional management group (P<0.01). Body weight and BMI decreased by 3.93kg and 1.40 kg/m2 in the high compliance group,compared to low compliance group,there was statistically difference with regard to this change between the two groups (P<0.05). While the body fat% was decreased by 2.27%,and it was increased by 1.01% in the conventional management group (P<0.05). Conclusion For rural residents,the beneficial effects of intensive lifestyle intervention are improving metabolic risk factors. The compliance is the main factor of the effects of intervention.
Key wordsMetabolic syndrome    Lifestyle intervention    Compliance
     出版日期: 2017-12-07
ZTFLH:  R589  
基金资助:“十二五”国家科技支撑项目(2012BAIO2B03);浙江省重点科技创新团队(2010R50050-13);萧山代谢综合征强化生活方式干预方案评价(2014215)
通信作者: 杨敏,E-mail:ymin36@zju.edu.cn   
作者简介: 喻森海,本科,副主任医师,主要从事社区基本医疗和公共卫生服务工作;潘飞霞,硕士,主要从事慢性病流行病学、分子流行病学研究(前两名作者为共同第一作者)
引用本文:   
喻森海,潘飞霞,顾杭杰,瞿琼,翟利君,郭灿安,徐春晓,周丹,杨敏,朱益民. 农村代谢综合征患者强化生活方式干预效果评价[J]. 预防医学, 2017, 29(12): 1193-1198.
YU Sen-hai,PAN Fei-xia,GU Hang-jie,QU Qiong,ZHAI Li-jun,GUO Can-an,XU Chun-xiao,ZHOU Dan,YANG Min,ZHU Yi-min. Effectiveness evaluation of intensive lifestyle intervention on rural residents with metabolic syndrome. Preventive Medicine, 2017, 29(12): 1193-1198.
链接本文:  
http://www.zjyfyxzz.com/CN/10.19485/j.cnki.issn1007-0931.2017.12.002      或      http://www.zjyfyxzz.com/CN/Y2017/V29/I12/1193
[1] XIAO J,WU C L,GAO Y X,et al. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its risk factors among rural adults in Nantong,China[J]. Sci Rep,2016,6:38089.
[2] ARYAL N,WASTI S P. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome in South Asia:a systematic review[J]. International Journal of Diabetes in Developing Countries,2016(3):255-262.
[3] XI B,HE D,HU Y,et al. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its influencing factors among the Chinese adults:the China Health and Nutrition Survey in 2009[J]. Prev Med,2013,57(6):867-871.
[4] WEN J P,YANG J A,SHI Y,et al. Comparisons of different metabolic syndrome definitions and associations with coronary heart disease,stroke,and peripheral arterial disease in a rural Chinese population[J]. Plos one ,2015(5):e0126832.
[5] GU D,REYNOLDS K,WU X,et al. Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome and overweight among adults in China[J]. Lancet,2005,365(9468):1398-1405.
[6] TREVISAN M,LIU J,BAHSAS F B,et al. Syndrome X and mortality:a population-based study. Risk Factor and Life Expectancy Research Group[J]. Am J Epidemiol,1998,148(10):958-966.
[7] KASSI E,PERVANIDOU P,KALTSAS G,et al. Metabolic syndrome:definitions and controversies[J]. BMC Med,2011,9:48.
[8] YAMAOKA K,TANGO T. Effects of lifestyle modification on metabolic syndrome:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BMC Med,2012,10:138.
[9] LIN C H,CHIANG S L,TZENG W C,et al. Systematic review of impact of lifestyle-modification programs on metabolic risks and patient-reported outcomes in adults with metabolic syndrome[J]. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs,2014,11(6):361-368.
[10]WATANABE M,YOKOTSUKA M,YAMAOKA K,et al. Effects of a lifestyle modification programme to reduce the number of risk factors for metabolic syndrome:a randomised controlled trial[J]. Public Health Nutr,2017,20(1):142-153.
[11]MULè G,CALCATERRA I,NARDI E,et al. Metabolic syndrome in hypertensive patients:An unholy alliance[J]. World J Cardiol,2014,6(9):890-907.
[12]HAGHIGHATDOOST F,AMINI M,FEIZI A,et al. Are body mass index and waist circumference significant predictors of diabetes and prediabetes risk:Results from a population based cohort study[J]. World Journal of Diabetes,2017,8(7):365-373.
[13]YING X,JIANG Y,QIN G,et al. Association of body mass index,waist circumference,and metabolic syndrome with serum cystatin C in a Chinese population[J]. Medicine (Baltimore),2017,96(10):e6289.
[14]ORCHARD T J,TEMPROSA M,GOLDBERG R,et al. The effect of metformin and intensive lifestyle intervention on the metabolic syndrome:the Diabetes Prevention Program randomized trial[J]. Ann Intern Med,2005,142(8):611-619.
[15]LIND L,ELMST?HL S,?RNL?V J. Change in body weight from age 20 years is a powerful determinant of the metabolic syndrome[J]. Metab Syndr Relat Disord,2017,15(3):112-117.
[16]MARKLUND M,MAGNUSDOTTIR O K,ROSQVIST F,et al. A dietary biomarker approach captures compliance and cardiometabolic effects of a healthy Nordic diet in individuals with metabolic syndrome[J]. J Nutr,2014,144(10):1642- 1649.
[17]O'MALLEY P G,KOWALCZYK C,BINDEMAN J,et al. The impact of cardiovascular risk factor case management on the metabolic syndrome in a primary prevention population:results from a randomized controlled trial[J]. J Cardiometab Syndr,2006,1(1):6-12.
[18]ILANNE-PARIKKA P,LAAKSONEN D E,ERIKSSON J G,et al. Leisure-time physical activity and the metabolic syndrome in the Finnish diabetes prevention study[J]. Diabetes Care,2010,33(7):1610-1617.
[19]田向阳. 中国农村健康教育与健康促进策略与模式研究[D]. 上海:复旦大学,2013.
[20]LIN Y H,CHU L L. The health promotion lifestyle of metabolic syndrome individuals with a diet and exercise programme[J]. Int J Nurs Pract,2014,20(2):142-148.
[1] 张艳梅, 杨红利, 孙光月. 帕金森病患者功能锻炼依从性及影响因素分析[J]. 预防医学, 2019, 31(2): 136-140.
[2] 冯惠春, 郑香琴, 王黎红, 周秋萍. 肺癌患者“放疗助手”APP健康教育效果评价[J]. 预防医学, 2019, 31(2): 140-143.
[3] 赵桂让,刘卫光,张卫红,祁田慧. 漯河市居民健康素养调查[J]. 预防医学, 2019, 31(11): 1176-1178.
[4] 陈巧玲,冯俊,何燕娟,吴玲玲. 义乌市居民健康素养调查[J]. 预防医学, 2019, 31(11): 1179-1182.
[5] 吴霞, 陆建林, 翁根龙. 老年代谢综合征患者尿酸、B型脑钠肽和超敏C反应蛋白水平分析[J]. 预防医学, 2019, 31(1): 59-61.
[6] 李江峰,潘优津,苏小游,郑超,郑艳容,苏依所,倪秀程. 温州市成人隐匿性自身免疫糖尿病调查结果[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(8): 827-829.
[7] 王鑫蕾,崔世维,朱晓晖,顾云娟,赵小芹 ,葛子君. 2型糖尿病患者简化格式化生活方式干预效果评价[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(8): 830-833.
[8] 胡进, 陆霞, 曲娟. 脑梗死出院患者抗血小板药物治疗的依从性分析[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(5): 502-505.
[9] 蒋剑波, 林玲萍, 杜丽云, 郑培奋. 杭州市中年人群三种膳食模式与代谢综合征的关系研究[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(12): 1222-1226.
[10] 金玫华, 杨中荣, 李婧, 董正全, 张思潮. 湖州市艾滋病患者抗病毒治疗服药依从性分析[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(12): 1231-1233.
[11] 赵志芳, 夏国琴, 陈菲儿, 周素兰, 戴春美. 基于“教学相长”理念的医护人员手卫生干预效果评价[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(11): 1088-1091.
[12] 周攀, 蒋丹, 郑睿智, 朱益民. 肾功能轻度下降与代谢综合征及其组分的关系[J]. 预防医学, 2017, 29(8): 786-789.
[13] 来时明, 尹志英, 李俊姬, 焦仕林, 周庆荣, 应国成. 狂犬病疫苗两种不同免疫程序接种依从性及经济成本比较[J]. 预防医学, 2017, 29(8): 857-860.
[14] 朱雯, 李辉, 王永, 崔军, 应焱燕, 李思萱, 朱银潮, 陈洁平, 龚清海, 张涛. 宁波市居民代谢综合征现况调查[J]. 预防医学, 2017, 29(7): 653-659.
[15] 赵世苗, 蒋海潮, 朱爱珍, 何云平. 系统性家庭治疗提高美沙酮维持治疗患者依从性的效果分析[J]. 预防医学, 2017, 29(6): 599-602.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed