Frequency of obesity and related risk factors among school children and adolescents in a low-income community. A cross-sectional study

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The frequency of obesity at an early age may contribute to atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adults. This study measured the frequency of obesity and cardiovascular risk factors in children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study in a school located in a region of low income and socioeconomic status in Santa Rita do Sapucai, Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: A total of 175 students were classified using body mass index (BMI) and their waist circumference, blood pressure, number of hours of sedentary behavior and school meals were evaluated. Serum concentrations of fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C) were analyzed. RESULTS: 37.2% of the students had BMI above the 85th percentile and had significantly lower age, higher prevalence of hypertension, higher serum TC, LDL-C and TG, and greater waist circumference than those with BMI below the 85th percentile. Hypertension was observed in 2.9% of the students; 5.1% presented impaired glucose tolerance, 40% had two risk factors for atherosclerosis and 26.9% had three risk factors. A sedentary lifestyle was significantly less prevalent among subjects with BMI above the 85th percentile and was significantly correlated with serum TC and LDL-C. The school meals were hypoglycemic, hyperproteic and hyperlipidemic. CONCLUSION: One third of the children and adolescents had weights greater than or equal to the age-adjusted weight, and this was associated with greater waist circumference, hypertension and prevalence of dyslipidemia

Comparação entre índice de massa corporal e índice de adiposidade coporal em adultos do sexo masculino

Comparison between body mass index and adiposity index body in adult maleAnthropometric measurements are important in the evaluation and classification of nutritional status of a person. Recently published a new index - Body Adiposity Index (BAI) for the purpose of replacing the Body Mass Index (BMI). This research conducted with 53 adult males was in order to evaluate and compare the two methods. For this we measure height, weight and hip circumference. After collecting the data the BMI calculations were performed and BAI. The results were divided into four groups according to the calculated BMI. Group 1 had a mean BMI = 20.30 kg / m² and average BAI = 21.67% fat. Group 2 had a mean BMI = 23.69 kg / m² and the average BAI = 23.90% fat. Group 3 showed average BMI = 27.97 kg / m² and the average BAI = 26.46% fat. Group 4 had a mean BMI = 33.28 kg / m² and the average BAI = 30.05% fat. According to the results of the BAI Group 1 showed an overestimation of body fat of individuals whereas in Groups 2, 3, 4 BAI was more accurate in their classification. And it is clear that none of the two methods, BMI and BAI are extremely safe in all cases.As medidas antropométricas são importantes na avaliação e classificação do estado nutricional de uma pessoa. Recentemente publicaram um novo índice - Índice de Adiposidade Corporal (IAC) com o propósito de substituir o Índice de Massa Corporal (IMC). Esta pesquisa desenvolvida com 53 adultos do sexo masculino foi com o intuito de avaliar e comparar os dois métodos. Para isso aferimos estatura, massa corporal e circunferência do quadril. Após a coleta dos dados foram realizados os cálculos de IMC e IAC. Os resultados foram divididos em quatro grupos de acordo com o IMC calculado. Grupo 1 apresentou média do IMC=20,30 Kg/m² e média de IAC= 21,67 % G.C.  Grupo 2 apresentou média do IMC=23,69 Kg/m² e média do IAC=23,90 % G.C. Grupo 3 apresentou média do IMC=27,97 Kg/m² e média do IAC=26,46 % G.C. Grupo 4 apresentou média do IMC= de 33,28 Kg/m² e média do IAC= 30,05 % G.C. De acordo com os resultados o Grupo 1 o IAC apresentou uma superestimação da gordura corporal dos indivíduos enquanto que nos Grupos 2, 3, 4 o IAC foi mais fidedigno em sua classificação. E com isso fica esclarecido que nenhum dos dois métodos, ou seja, IMC e IAC são extremamente seguros em todos os casos.

Comparação entre índice de massa corporal e índice de adiposidade coporal em adultos do sexo masculino

As medidas antropométricas são importantes na avaliação e classificação do estado nutricional de uma pessoa. Recentemente publicaram um novo índice - Índice de Adiposidade Corporal (IAC) com o propósito de substituir o Índice de Massa Corporal (IMC). Esta pesquisa desenvolvida com 53 adultos do sexo masculino foi com o intuito de avaliar e comparar os dois métodos. Para isso aferimos estatura, massa corporal e circunferência do quadril. Após a coleta dos dados foram realizados os cálculos de IMC e IAC. Os resultados foram divididos em quatro grupos de acordo com o IMC calculado. Grupo 1 apresentou média do IMC=20,30 Kg/m² e média de IAC= 21,67 % G.C.  Grupo 2 apresentou média do IMC=23,69 Kg/m² e média do IAC=23,90 % G.C. Grupo 3 apresentou média do IMC=27,97 Kg/m² e média do IAC=26,46 % G.C. Grupo 4 apresentou média do IMC= de 33,28 Kg/m² e média do IAC= 30,05 % G.C. De acordo com os resultados o Grupo 1 o IAC apresentou uma superestimação da gordura corporal dos indivíduos enquanto que nos Grupos 2, 3, 4 o IAC foi mais fidedigno em sua classificação. E com isso fica esclarecido que nenhum dos dois métodos, ou seja, IMC e IAC são extremamente seguros em todos os casos. ABSTRACTComparison between body mass index and adiposity index body in adult maleAnthropometric measurements are important in the evaluation and classification of nutritional status of a person. Recently published a new index - Body Adiposity Index (BAI) for the purpose of replacing the Body Mass Index (BMI). This research conducted with 53 adult males was in order to evaluate and compare the two methods. For this we measure height, weight and hip circumference. After collecting the data the BMI calculations were performed and BAI. The results were divided into four groups according to the calculated BMI. Group 1 had a mean BMI = 20.30 kg / m² and average BAI = 21.67% fat. Group 2 had a mean BMI = 23.69 kg / m² and the average BAI = 23.90% fat. Group 3 showed average BMI = 27.97 kg / m² and the average BAI = 26.46% fat. Group 4 had a mean BMI = 33.28 kg / m² and the average BAI = 30.05% fat. According to the results of the BAI Group 1 showed an overestimation of body fat of individuals whereas in Groups 2, 3, 4 BAI was more accurate in their classification. And it is clear that none of the two methods, BMI and BAI are extremely safe in all cases