Associations between healthy eating patterns and indicators of metabolic risk in postmenopausal women

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Since human diets contain many components that may work synergistically to prevent or promote disease, assessing diet quality may be informative. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between quality diet, by using Healthy Eating Index (HEI), and metabolic risk indicators in postmenopausal women.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This cross-sectional study included a total of 173 Brazilian women, aged 45-75 years, seeking healthcare at a public outpatient center. Food consumption assessed by 24 h-recall food inquiry was used to calculate HEI scores: >80 implied diet good, 80-51 diet "needed improvement", and <51 diet poor. Anthropometric data included: body mass index (BMI = weight/height²), waist-circumference (WC), body fat (%BF) and lean mass (%LM). Data on total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC), and triglycerides (TG) were also collected. Fisher's Exact test, and logistic regression method (to determine odds ratio, OR) were used in the statistical analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overweight and obesity were observed in 75.7% of the participants. Excessive %BF (> 35%) was observed in 56.1%, while %LM was reduced (< 70%) in 78.1%. WC was elevated (≥88 cm) in 72.3%. Based on HEI values, diet quality was good in 3% (5/173), needed improvement in 48.5% (84/173), and was poor in 48.5% (84/173) of the cases. In this group, 75% of women had high intakes of lipids (> 35%), predominantly saturated and monounsaturated fat. On average, plasma TC, LDLC, and TG levels were higher than recommended in 57.2%, 79.2% and 45.1% of the women, respectively, while HDLC was low in 50.8%. There was association between HEI scores and the %BF that it was higher among women with HEI score < 80 (p = 0.021). There were not observed significant risk associations between HEI and lipid profile.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Among the Brazilian postmenopausal women attending a public outpatient clinic, diet was considered to need improvement or to be of poor quality, attributed to high saturated fat ingestion, which probably caused a negative impact on metabolic risk indicators, namely body composition.</p

Beyond the Evidence of the New Hypertension Guidelines. Blood pressure measurement – is it good enough for accurate diagnosis of hypertension? Time might be in, for a paradigm shift (I)

Despite widespread availability of a large body of evidence in the area of hypertension, the translation of that evidence into viable recommendations aimed at improving the quality of health care is very difficult, sometimes to the point of questionable acceptability and overall credibility of the guidelines advocating those recommendations. The scientific community world-wide and especially professionals interested in the topic of hypertension are witnessing currently an unprecedented debate over the issue of appropriateness of using different drugs/drug classes for the treatment of hypertension. An endless supply of recent and less recent "drug-news", some in support of, others against the current guidelines, justifying the use of selected types of drug treatment or criticising other, are coming out in the scientific literature on an almost weekly basis. The latest of such debate (at the time of writing this paper) pertains the safety profile of ARBs vs ACE inhibitors. To great extent, the factual situation has been fuelled by the new hypertension guidelines (different for USA, Europe, New Zeeland and UK) through, apparently small inconsistencies and conflicting messages, that might have generated substantial and perpetuating confusion among both prescribing physicians and their patients, regardless of their country of origin. The overwhelming message conveyed by most guidelines and opinion leaders is the widespread use of diuretics as first-line agents in all patients with blood pressure above a certain cut-off level and the increasingly aggressive approach towards diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. This, apparently well-justified, logical and easily comprehensible message is unfortunately miss-obeyed by most physicians, on both parts of the Atlantic. Amazingly, the message assumes a universal simplicity of both diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, while ignoring several hypertension-specific variables, commonly known to have high level of complexity, such as: - accuracy of recorded blood pressure and the great inter-observer variability, - diversity in the competency and training of diagnosing physician, - individual patient/disease profile with highly subjective preferences, - difficulty in reaching consensus among opinion leaders, - pharmaceutical industry's influence, and, nonetheless, - the large variability in the efficacy and safety of the antihypertensive drugs. The present 2-series article attempts to identify and review possible causes that might have, at least in part, generated the current healthcare anachronism (I); to highlight the current trend to account for the uncertainties related to the fixed blood pressure cut-off point and the possible solutions to improve accuracy of diagnosis and treatment of hypertension (II)

Factors and comorbidities associated with first neuropsychiatric event in systemic lupus erythematosus: does a risk profile exist? A large multicentre retrospective cross-sectional study on 959 Italian patients

To analyse risk factors and comorbidities potentially associated with CNS involvement in a large cohort of Italian patients affected by SLE