...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care >Total energy expenditure is comparable between patients with and without diabetes mellitus: Clinical Evaluation of Energy Requirements in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (CLEVER-DM) Study
【24h】

Total energy expenditure is comparable between patients with and without diabetes mellitus: Clinical Evaluation of Energy Requirements in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (CLEVER-DM) Study

机译:糖尿病患者与非糖尿病患者的总能量消耗相当:糖尿病患者能量需求的临床评估(CLEVER-DM)研究

获取原文

摘要

Objective Assessment of total energy expenditure (TEE) is essential for appropriate recommendations regarding dietary intake and physical activity in patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM). However, few reports have focused on TEE in patients with DM, particularly in Asian countries. Therefore, we evaluated TEE in Japanese patients with DM using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method and physical activity level (PAL).Research design and methods In this cross-sectional observational study, we evaluated 52 patients with type 2?DM and 15 patients without DM. Free-living TEE was measured over 12–16 days by the DLW method, and PAL was calculated as TEE divided by the basal metabolic rate (BMR) as assessed by indirect calorimetry. The equivalence margin was defined as 5 kcal/kg/day.Results The numbers of patients with DM treated with insulin, oral antidiabetic drugs, and diet were 18 (34.6%), 20 (38.5%), and 14 (26.9%), respectively. The mean±SD level of glycated hemoglobin was 6.9%±0.8% and 5.5%±0.3% in the DM and non-DM group, respectively (p0.001). The mean body mass index was 23.3±3.0?and 22.7±2.1?kg/m2 in the DM and non-DM group, respectively. The mean TEE per kilogram body weight adjusted for sex and age was 36.5 kcal/kg/day and 37.5 kcal/kg/day in the DM and non-DM group, respectively, with no significant difference (mean difference, ?1.0 kcal/kg/day; 95% CI -4.2 to 2.3 kcal/kg/day). The BMR tended to be higher in the DM than in the non-DM group (mean difference, 33 kcal/day; 95%?CI, ?15 to 80 kcal/day). The mean PAL adjusted for sex and age was 1.71 and 1.81 in the DM and non-DM group, respectively, without a significant difference (mean difference, ?0.10; 95%?CI ?0.21 to 0.01).Conclusion TEE was comparable between Japanese patients with and without DM.Trial registration number UMIN000023051.
机译:客观评估总能量消耗(TEE)对于有关患有和不患有糖尿病(DM)的患者的饮食摄入和身体活动的适当建议至关重要。但是,很少有报道关注DM患者的TEE,特别是在亚洲国家。因此,我们使用双标记水(DLW)方法和体力活动水平(PAL)方法评估了日本DM患者的TEE。研究设计和方法在本项横断面观察性研究中,我们评估了52例2型糖尿病和15例2型糖尿病患者。没有DM的患者。用DLW方法测量12-16天的自由活动TEE,PAL计算为TEE除以间接量热法评估的基础代谢率(BMR)。当量裕度定义为5 kcal / kg / day。结果接受胰岛素,口服降糖药和饮食治疗的DM患者分别为18(34.6%),20(38.5%)和14(26.9%),分别。 DM组和非DM组糖化血红蛋白的平均±SD水平分别为6.9%±0.8%和5.5%±0.3%(p <0.001)。 DM组和非DM组的平均体重指数分别为23.3±3.0?和22.7±2.1?kg / m2。在DM和非DM组中,按性别和年龄调整的每公斤体重的平均TEE分别为36.5 kcal / kg /天和37.5 kcal / kg /天,差异无统计学意义(均值,≥1.0kcal / kg) /天; 95%CI -4.2至2.3 kcal / kg /天。 DM中的BMR倾向于高于非DM组(平均差异为33 kcal /天; 95%?CI为?15至80 kcal /天)。 DM组和非DM组经性别和年龄调整的平均PAL分别为1.71和1.81,无显着性差异(平均值差异为0.10; 95%CI为0.21至0.01)。有或没有DM的患者。注册号为UMIN000023051。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号