Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Comparison of insulin resistance by indirect methods - HOMA, QUICKI and McAuley - with fasting insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes in Galle,Sri Lanka: A pilot study

By Dr. Lukshmy Menik Hettihewa, Dr. Shalika Palangasinghe, Dr. Sudheera S Jayasinghe, Dr. Sudari W Gunasekara and Dr. Thilak P Weerarathna

Abstract

Background: To investigate importance of fasting insulin (FI) as a diagnostic test for insulin resistance (IR) and to compare with other standard methods McAuley (McA), HOMA and QUICKI indices in Diabetes Mellitus (DM). Method: 42 diabetic patients who have been already diagnosed were used in our study. They were investigated for fasting blood glucose (FBS), FI, LDL, Triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC) and HDL levels. IR was calculated by McA, HOMA, QUICKI indices and by FI. Results: 81% of patients were insulin resistant by McA and FI in our study group. 93% were detected as insulin resistant by HOMA and QUICKI. IR by FI was further compared with HOMA and QUICKI and 81% of patients were found to be insulin resistant by FI, HOMA and QUICKI. Results showed that there was a significant correlation between FI and McA in expressing IR in our study group (p <0.01, r = -0.849). Further, FI had a statistically significant correlation with HOMA and QUICKI indices (p <0.01, r = 0.906 and p <0.01 r = -0.822 respectively). Conclusion: FI measurement alone in diabetic patients has detected IR in 81% of patients, similar to the other standard methods (McA; 81%, HOMA and QUICKI; 93%). We further identified that FI as a diagnostic test of IR had substantial correlation with McA. Our results recommend further studies to see the possibility of taking fasting insulin to determine IR in type 2 diabetic populatio

Topics: Online Journal of Health and Allied Sciences
Publisher: Dr. B.S. Kakkilaya
Year: 2006
OAI identifier: oai:cogprints.org:5000
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://cogprints.org/5000/1/20... (external link)
  • http://cogprints.org/5000/ (external link)
  • Suggested articles

    Citations

    1. (1985). Assessment of insulin sensitivity in vivo. Endocr Rev
    2. Diagnosing insulin resistance in the general population.
    3. Homeostasis Model Assessment closely mirrors the glu cose clamp technique in the assessment of insulin sensitivity.
    4. (1985). Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and b cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentration in man. Diabetologia
    5. (1998). How to measure insulin sensitivity.
    6. Insulin resistance is central to the burden of diabetes.
    7. Insulin resistance: a multifaceted syndrome re sponsible for NIDDM, obesity, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Diabetes care 1991;14:173-194.
    8. (1999). Insulin sensitivity indices obtained from oral glucose tolerance testing: comparison with the euglycaemic clamp. Diabetes Care
    9. Original Article. Comparison of insulin resistance by indirect methods.
    10. Quantitative insulin sensitivity check index: a simple, accurate method of as sessing insulin sensitivity in humans.

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.