| Literature DB >> 28086906 |
Van Dinh Tran1,2, Andy H Lee3, Jonine Jancey3,4, Anthony P James3,5, Peter Howat3,4, Le Thi Phuong Mai6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome is prevalent among Vietnamese adults, especially those aged 50-65 years. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a 6 month community-based lifestyle intervention to increase physical activity levels and improve dietary behaviours for adults with metabolic syndrome in Vietnam.Entities:
Keywords: Vietnam; dietary behaviours; health promotion; metabolic syndrome; physical activity; randomized controlled trial; walking
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28086906 PMCID: PMC5237359 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1771-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trials ISSN: 1745-6215 Impact factor: 2.279
Fig. 1CONSORT flow chart. BMI, body mass index
Baseline characteristics of intervention and control participants (n = 337)
| Variable | Intervention group ( | Control group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age: mean (standard deviation), years | 57.57 (4.93) | 57.23 (4.87) | 0.52 |
| Weight: mean (standard deviation), kg | 60.18 (7.70) | 60.32 (7.82) | 0.88 |
| Body mass index: mean (standard deviation) | 24.97 (1.92) | 25.21 (2.29) | 0.36 |
| Waist circumference: mean (standard deviation), cm | 87.12 (5.62) | 87.59 (6.22) | 0.47 |
| Hip circumference: mean (standard deviation), cm | 94.27 (4.77) | 93.70 (6.04) | 0.33 |
| Sex | 0.36 | ||
| Female | 144 (82.3%) | 127 (78.4%) | |
| Male | 31 (17.7%) | 35 (21.6%) | |
| Education level | 0.29 | ||
| Primary school or below | 14 (8.0%) | 17 (10.5%) | |
| Secondary school | 89 (50.9%) | 94 (58.0%) | |
| High school | 45 (25.7%) | 34 (21.0%) | |
| College or university | 27 (15.4%) | 17 (10.5%) | |
| Relationship status | 0.99 | ||
| No partner | 15 (8.6%) | 15 (9.3%) | |
| With partner | 160 (91.4%) | 147 (90.7%) | |
| Occupation | 0.55 | ||
| Farmer or manual worker | 41 (23.4%) | 49 (30.2%) | |
| Office job | 11 (6.3%) | 8 (4.9%) | |
| Retired | 55 (31.4%) | 50 (30.9%) | |
| Business | 18 (10.3%) | 11 (6.8%) | |
| Home duties and others | 50 (28.6%) | 44 (27.2%) | |
| Smoking status | 0.58 | ||
| Never | 154 (88.0%) | 138 (85.2%) | |
| Former | 10 (5.7%) | 14 (8.6%) | |
| Current smoker | 11 (6.3%) | 10 (6.2%) | |
| Alcohol drinking | 0.30 | ||
| No | 145 (82.9%) | 127 (78.4%) | |
| Yes | 30 (17.1%) | 35 (21.6%) |
aChi-square or t test between intervention and control groups
Comparison of physical activity outcomes over time and between intervention and control groups (n = 337)
| Outcome | Intervention group ( |
| Control group ( |
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Post | Baseline | Post | |||||
| Vigorous activitye | 22 (12.6%) | 12 (6.9%) | 0.071 | 15 (9.3%) | 6 (3.7%) | 0.042 | 0.331 | 0.198 |
| Moderate activitye | 26 (14.9%) | 61 (34.9%) | <0.001 | 24 (14.8%) | 30 (18.5%) | 0.371 | 0.991 | 0.001 |
| Walking time: mean (standard deviation)f | 366.3 (396.6) | 588.3 (491.3) | <0.001 | 333.6 (394.3) | 326.7 (355.0) | 0.680 | 0.160 | <0.001 |
| Total physical activity: mean (standard deviation)f | 478.5 (496.2) | 862.7 (692.5) | <0.001 | 448.4 (447.9) | 502.9 (496.6) | 0.260 | 0.470 | <0.001 |
| Sitting time: mean (standard deviation) min/week | 2,668.7 (764.0) | 1,911.5 (769.8) | <0.001 | 2,733.5 (807.7) | 2,371.2 (963.7) | <0.001 | 0.450 | <0.001 |
| Pedometer: mean (standard deviation), steps/week | 48,722 (20,974) | 53,882 (20,774) | 0.011 | |||||
aBetween baseline and post-intervention tests for intervention group
bBetween baseline and post-intervention tests for control group
cBetween intervention and control groups at baseline
dBetween intervention and control groups at post-intervention testing
eParticipation of at least 10 min
fNon-parametric test applied to MET, min/week
Mixed regression analyses of physical activity outcomes before and after intervention (n = 337)
| Outcome | Group: intervention | Time: post | Group × Time | Random component | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
|
|
| |
| Vigorous activitya | 0.414 (−0.817, 1.645) | 0.509 | −1.023 (−0.020, −0.026) | 0.044 | 0.297 (−0.962, 1.556) | 0.643 | 0.751 | 0.714 |
| Moderate activitya | −0.143 (−1.325, 1.040) | 0.813 | 0.281 (−0.322, 0.883) | 0.361 | 0.99 (0.169, 1.810) | 0.018 | 0.782 | 0.501 |
| Walking timeb,d | −0.039 (−0.126, 0.048) | 0.376 | 0.011 (−0.056, −0.078) | 0.745 | 0.168 (0.080, 0.255) | <0.001 | 0.044 | 0.083 |
| Total physical activityb,d | −0.032 (−0.129, 0.065) | 0.518 | 0.059 (−0.009, 0.127) | 0.091 | 0.154 (0.063, 0.244) | 0.001 | 0.054 | 0.114 |
| Sitting timec | −0.026 (−0.131, 0.079) | 0.627 | −0.146 (−0.218, −0.075) | <0.001 | −0.191 (−0.291, −0.092) | <0.001 | 0.054 | 0.100 |
aLogistic mixed regression model
bLinear mixed regression model
cGamma mixed regression model
dLogarithmic transformed
eAdjusted for age, sex, education level, relationship status, occupation, smoking status and alcohol drinking
fCommune random effect
gParticipant random effect
Comparison of dietary behaviour outcomes over time and between intervention and control groups (n = 337)
| Outcome | Intervention group ( |
| Control group ( |
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Post | Baseline n (%) | Post n (%) | |||||
| Frequent vegetable intakee | 164 (93.7) | 168 (96.0) | 0.333 | 152 (93.8) | 143 (88.3) | 0.080 | 0.966 | 0.008 |
| Frequent fruit intakee | 72 (41.1) | 85 (48.6) | 0.162 | 47 (29.0) | 61 (37.7) | 0.099 | 0.020 | 0.040 |
| Frequent use of cooking oile | 64 (36.6) | 36 (20.6) | 0.001 | 41 (25.3) | 50 (30.9) | 0.266 | 0.026 | 0.030 |
| Frequent use of salte | 171 (97.7) | 90 (51.4) | <0.001 | 158 (97.5) | 115 (71.0) | <0.001 | 0.910 | <0.001 |
| Frequent intake of animal internal organsf | 49 (28.0) | 19 (10.9) | <0.001 | 37 (22.8) | 35 (21.6) | 0.789 | 0.278 | 0.007 |
aBetween baseline and post-intervention tests for intervention group
bBetween baseline and post-intervention tests for control group
cBetween intervention and control groups at baseline
dBetween intervention and control groups at post-intervention testing
eAt least once per day
fMore than twice per month
Logistic mixed regression analyses of dietary behaviour outcomes before and after intervention (n = 337)
| Outcome | Group: intervention | Time: post | Group × Time | Random component | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) |
|
|
| |
| Frequent vegetable intakea | −0.097 (−1.321, 1.127) | 0.876 | −0.738 (−1.558, 0.081) | 0.077 | 1.229 (−0.055, 2.514) | 0.061 | 0.603 | 0.333 |
| Frequent fruit intakea | 0.67 (−0.333, 1.672) | 0.190 | 0.444 (−0.053, 0.942) | 0.080 | −0.081 (−0.762, 0.600) | 0.816 | 0.678 | 0.761 |
| Frequent use of cooking oila | 0.246 (−0.805, 1.298) | 0.646 | 0.294 (−0.209, 0.797) | 0.252 | −1.216 (−1.939, −0.494) | 0.001 | 0.736 | 0.001 |
| Frequent use of salta | 0.109 (−1.444, 1.663) | 0.890 | −2.843 (−3.901, −1.784) | <0.001 | −1.049 (−2.540, 0.442) | 0.168 | 0.487 | 0.404 |
| Frequent intake of animal internal organsb | 0.047 (−1.240, 1.335) | 0.942 | −0.080 (−0.635, 0.475) | 0.778 | −1.469 (−2.351, −0.587) | 0.001 | 0.904 | 0.768 |
aAt least once per day
bMore than twice per month
cAdjusted for age, sex, education level, relationship status, occupation, smoking status and alcohol consumption
dCommune random effect
eParticipant random effect