Does body image perception relate to quality of life in middle-aged women?

<div><p>Objective</p><p>In Brazil, information about the influence of body image on the various life domains of women in menopausal transition is scarce. Thus, the objective of the study was to analyze the relationship between body image and quality of life in middle-aged Brazilian women.</p><p>Methods</p><p>This was a cross-sectional study of 250 women between 40 and 65 years old, living in Parnamirim/RN, Brazil, who were evaluated in relation to body image and quality of life. For body image, women were classified as: dissatisfied due to low weight, satisfied (with their body weight) and dissatisfied due to being overweight. Quality of life was assessed through a questionnaire in which higher values indicate higher quality of life. Multiple linear regression was performed to analyze the relationship between body image and quality of life, adjusted for covariates that presented p<0.20 in the bivariate analysis.</p><p>Results</p><p>The average age was 52.1 (± 5.6) years, 82% of the women reported being dissatisfied due to being overweight, and 4.4% were dissatisfied due to having low weight. After multiple linear regression analyzes, body image remained associated with health (p<0.001), emotional (p = 0.016), and sexual (p = 0.048) domains of quality of life, as well as total score of the questionnaire (p<0.001).</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Women who reported being dissatisfied with their body image due to having low weight or overweight had worse quality of life in comparison to those who were satisfied (with their body weight).</p></div

Characterization of the sample.

<p>Characterization of the sample.</p

Multiple linear regression analysis for the UQoL domains and total score.

<p>Parnamirim, RN, Brazil, 2017.</p

Relationship between independent variables and the quality of life domains.

<p>Relationship between independent variables and the quality of life domains.</p

Relationship between glycemic control and OPG gene polymorphisms with lower bone mineral density in patients with type 1 Diabetes mellitus

<div><p>ABSTRACT The aim of the present study was to investigate the bone mineral density (BMD) of patients with type 1 Diabetes mellitus (T1DM). We also assessed the association between osteoprotegerin (OPG) genetic polymorphisms and BMD. Genotyping was performed for 1181G>C and 163A>G OPG polymorphisms by allelic discrimination in 119 patients with T1DM and 161 normoglycemic (NG) individuals, aged 6 to 20 years old. Glycemic control, serum parameters of bone metabolism and BMD were evaluated. T1DM patients showed low BMD, poor glycemic control and decreased total calcium values when compared to controls (p < 0.05). For all the polymorphisms studied, the genotype and allele frequencies in patients with T1DM were not significantly different from the controls. In patients with T1DM, carriers of OPG 1181CC showed higher concentrations of ionized calcium compared to patients with GG+GC genotypes. These results suggest that low BMD is associated with poor glycemic control in T1DM. Despite the lack of a detected association between OPG polymorphisms and BMD in these patients, the increased ionized calcium in those carrying OPG 1181CC suggests a possible increase in osteoclastogenesis, a conclusion that may be supported by the lower BMD observed in these subjects.</p></div

Relative mRNA expression quantification.

<p><i>RANKL</i> (A), <i>OPG</i> (B), <i>OC</i> (C), <i>COL1A</i> (D), <i>MMP-2</i> (E), and <i>MMP-9</i> (F) mRNA expression in bone tissue of control, type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and T1DM plus zinc supplementation (T1DMS) rats. All data are expressed as fold-change vs. control group values, normalized to <i>GAPDH</i>. Comparisons between groups were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on Ranks and Dunn’s post-hoc. <i>p</i> < 0.05*^/# vs. control group; <i>p</i> < 0.01*^/## vs. control group.</p

Assessment of collagen deposition by picrosirius red staining.

<p>Tibia staining for collagen content (picrosirius red). Total collagen (A), collagen type I (B), and collagen type III (C) contents of the control, type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and T1DM plus zinc supplementation (T1DMS) groups. All data are shown as means ± SEM. Comparisons between groups were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on Ranks and Dunn’s post-hoc. <i>p</i> < 0.05 *^/# vs. control group.</p

Histological analyses of the right tibias.

<p>Hematoxylin and eosin staining of longitudinal sections of tibias of the control (A), type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) (B), and T1DM plus zinc supplementation (T1DMS) (C) groups. TB, trabecular bone; MS, medullary space; magnification 20X, scale bar: 50 μm.</p

Histomorphometric analyses of structural bone architecture.

<p>Trabecular separation (TbSP, μm) (A), trabecular width (TbWi, μm) (B), and trabecular bone area (BAr, %) (C) of control, type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and T1DM plus zinc supplementation (T1DMS) rats. All data are shown as means ± SEM. Comparisons between groups were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on Ranks and Dunn’s post-hoc. <i>p</i> < 0.01*^/## vs. control group; <i>p</i> < 0.001*^/### vs. control group; <i>p</i> < 0.05 **^/# vs. T1DM group; <i>p</i> < 0.001**^/### vs. T1DM group.</p

Tibia biomechanical parameters of control, diabetic, and diabetic plus zinc supplementation groups.

<p>T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; T1DMS, T1DM plus zinc supplementation. All data are shown as means ± SEM. Comparisons between groups were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on Ranks and Dunn’s post-hoc.</p><p>*^/#<i>p</i> < 0.05 vs. control group;</p><p>*^/##<i>p</i> < 0.01 vs. control group.</p><p>Tibia biomechanical parameters of control, diabetic, and diabetic plus zinc supplementation groups.</p