| Literature DB >> 31531358 |
Ijaz Ul Haq1, Yu Liu2, Min Liu2, Haifeng Xu2, Hui Wang3, Chunlan Liu3, Falak Zeb1, Pan Jiang1, Xiaoyue Wu1, Yuanrui Tian3, Mengxia Li3, Qun Li4, Jun Fu4, Chong Shen3, Qing Feng1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smoking is the second leading cause of death. Limited studies are available about smoking and overall diet quality. The current study was aimed at finding an association of s-KAP (smoking-related knowledge, attitude, and practices) with nutritional status and diet quality.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31531358 PMCID: PMC6720361 DOI: 10.1155/2019/5897478
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Total 11,151 individuals were investigated for this study. Individuals with chronic diseases (N=3153) were excluded. Finally, 7,798 individuals were included in this study.
General characteristics of the study population.
| Variables | Males (3078) | Females (4920) | Total (7998) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age a | 60.7±11.3 | 58.4±11.4 | 59.3±11.4 | |
| Education b | No response | 6(0.2) | 8(0.2) | 14 (0.2) |
| < Middle schooling | 1483(48.2) | 3362 (68.3) | 4845 (60.6) | |
| Middle schooling | 1125 (36.5) | 1201 (24.4) | 2326 (29.1) | |
| High schooling | 413 (13.4) | 305 (6.2) | 718 (9.0) | |
| College and above | 51 (1.7) | 44 (0.9) | 95 (1.2) | |
| Monthly income per person b | <2000 RMB | 2279 (74.0) | 3722 (75.7) | 6001 (75.0) |
| 2001-4000 RMB | 567 (18.4) | 889 (18.1) | 1456 (18.2) | |
| >4000 RMB | 232 (7.5) | 309 (6.3) | 541 (6.8) | |
| Smoking status b | No response | 0 (0.0) | 1(0.0) | 1 (0.0) |
| Yes | 1732 (56.3) | 61 (1.2) | 1793 (22.4) | |
| No | 1346 (43.7) | 4858 (98.7) | 6204 (77.6) | |
| Second-hand smoking b | No response | 1(0.0) | 2(0.0) | 3 (0.0) |
| Yes | 1738 (56.5) | 2861(58.2) | 4599 (57.5) | |
| No | 1339 (43.5) | 2057 (41.8) | 3396 (42.5) | |
| Drinking alcohol b | Never | 1291 (41.9) | 4440 (90.2) | 5731 (71.7) |
| Yes | 1787 (58.1) | 480 (9.8) | 2265 (28.3) | |
| BMI (Kg/m2) a | 24.6±3.5 | 25.1±3.6 | 24.9±3.6 | |
| BMI b | <18.5 | 58 (1.9) | 60 (1.2) | 118 (1.5) |
| 18.5-23.9 | 1243 (41.3) | 1807 (37.4) | 3050(38.1) | |
| 24.0-27.9 | 1269 (42.1) | 2049 (42.4) | 3318(41.5) | |
| ≥28 | 442 (14.7) | 912 (18.9) | 1354(16.9) | |
| WC (cm) a | 83.3±9.6 | 81.3±9.5 | 82.1±9.6 | |
| Central Obesity b | Normal | 2227(74.0) | 2174 (44.2) | 4451 (55.7) |
| Waist ≥90 for males and waist ≥80 for females | 801 (26.0) | 2746 (56.8) | 3547 (44.3) | |
| WHR (WC/HR) a | 0.89±0.06 | 0.86±0.07 | 0.87±0.07 | |
| Abdominal Obesity b | Normal | 2251 (82.9) | 599 (12.2) | 3150 (39.4) |
| Obese WHR> 0.94 males and >0.80 Females | 527 (17.1) | 4321 (87.8) | 4848 (60.6) | |
| s-KAP scores∗∗ | 11.7±3.6 | 13.1±5 | 12.5±3.7 | |
| Diet Scores∗∗ | 41.8±11.8 | 38.6±10.7 | 42.7±10.7 |
a=Independent t-test; b=Chi square test; ∗∗=P<0.01.
Data are expressed as mean±SD and N (%).
Comparison of smoking-related KAP according to diet scores and anthropometric measurements.
| Low s-KAP(N=3987) | High s-KAP(N=4011) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diet scores | 41.2±10.7 (40.8;41.5) | 44.4±10.6 (43.7; 44.4) | P<0.001 |
| BMI (Kg/m2) | 24.8±3.7 (24.7; 24.9) | 25.0±3.4 (24.9; 25.1) | 0.015 |
| Waist Circumference (cm) | 82.5±9.7 (82.1, 82.8) | 81.6±9.5 (81.3; 82.9) | P<0.001 |
| WHR (WC/HC) | 0.88±0.07 (0.878; 0.882) | 0.87±0.06 (0.866, 0.870) | P<0.001 |
Independent t-tests were used for comparison.
Data are expressed as mean±SD (95 % CI).
Figure 2Association of nutritional status with s-KAP scores (a) Relation between BMI with s-KAP scores (r=0.050, P<0.05) (b) Relation between WC with s-KAP scores (r=-0.047, P<0.05) (c) Relation between WHR with s-KAP scores (r=-0.103, P<0.05).
Multivariate linear regression analysis for the association of s-KAP scores and diet quality scores
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whole population (N=7998) | 0.341 (0.269, 0.414)∗∗ | 0.342 (0.270, 0. 414)∗∗ | 0.337 (0.265, 0.410)∗∗ |
| Hypertension | |||
| Yes (N=4656) | 0.337 (0.240, 0.433)∗∗ | 0.338 (0.242, 0.434)∗∗ | 0.330(0.233, 0.426) ∗∗ |
| No (N=3342) | 0.350 (0.240, 0.461)∗∗ | 0.351 (0.241, 0.461)∗∗ | 0.350 (0.240, 0.460) ∗∗ |
| Diabetes | |||
| Yes (N=751) | 0.530 (0.281, 0.779) ∗∗ | 0.517 (0.270, 0.765)∗∗ | 0.515 (0.267, 0.763)∗∗ |
| No (N=7247) | 0.315 (0.240, 0.391)∗∗ | 0.316 (0.240, 0.391)∗∗ | 0.311 (0.236, 0.387)∗∗ |
Data as expressed as ß (95 % CI) values.
∗indicates P<0.05;∗∗indicates P<0.01
Model 1 is adjusted for age, gender, physical activity index, alcohol consumptions, educational levels, income, and BMI.
Model 2 is adjusted for age, gender, physical activity index, alcohol consumptions, educational levels, income, and WC.
Model 3 is adjusted for age, gender, physical activity index, alcohol consumptions, educational levels, income, and WHR.