| Literature DB >> 31679507 |
Paula Costa-Urrutia1,2, Rafael Álvarez-Fariña3, Carolina Abud3, Valentina Franco-Trecu4, Julián Esparza-Romero5, Cruz Mónica López-Morales6, Martha Eunice Rodríguez-Arellano7, Jaime Valle Leal8, Valentina Colistro9, Julio Granados10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mexico occupies one of the first places worldwide in childhood obesity. Its Mestizo and Indigenous communities present different levels of westernization which have triggered different epidemiological diseases. We assessed the effects of a multi-component school-based intervention program on obesity, cardiovascular and diabetes risk factors.Entities:
Keywords: BMI diabetes risk; Cardiovascular risk; Childhood obesity; Ethnic groups
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31679507 PMCID: PMC6827243 DOI: 10.1186/s12887-019-1787-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pediatr ISSN: 1471-2431 Impact factor: 2.125
Groups of girls and boys per ethnic group and treatments (T1 and T2) and the percentages of those classified with overweight-obesity (OWOB)
| Total number | Girls | Girls with OWOB | Boys | Boys with OWOB (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mestizos under T1 | 44 | 12 | 7 (58.3%) | 32 | 19 (59.3%) |
| Mestizos under T2 | 117 | 72 | 31 (43.1%) | 45 | 21 (46.7%) |
| Seris | 44 | 24 | 8 (33.3%) | 20 | 8 (40%) |
| Yaquis | 115 | 49 | 11 (22.4%) | 66 | 21 (31.8%) |
General characteristics and comparisons of the variables before and after treatment 1. Descriptive results related ethnic groups (Mestizos, Seris, Yaquis) at baseline and after treatments (AT) comparison. Outcomes were BMI (Body mass index), TC (Total Cholesterol), LDL (Low Density Lipoprotein), HDL (High Density Lipoprotein), GL (Glucose), HbA1c (Glycosylated hemoglobin). m (median), IQR (Inter Quartile Range, Q1-Q3). T1 consisted on Physical Activity Program, Health education program and Parent
| Treatment 1 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mestizos | Seris | Yaquis | |||||||
| Variables | Baseline m (IQR) | AT m (IQR) | p -value | Baseline m (IQR) | AT m (IQR) | Baseline m (IQR) | AT m (IQR) | p-value | |
| BMI (km/m2) | 16.8 (15.2, 19.8) | 16.7 (15.2, 20.0) | 0.94 | 17.6 (15.5, 20.5) | 17.7 (15.4, 22.0) | 0.84 | 16.1 (14.7, 18.7) | 17.1 (15.5, 19.5) | 9.0 × 10− 3 |
| BMI z-score | 0.3 (−0.4,1.8) | 0.2(−0.5,1.1) | 0.03 | −0.4(− 0.8,0.6) | −0.5(− 0.8,0.3) | 0.85 | −0.4(− 0.8,0.1) | −0.4(− 0.7,0.4) | 0.63 |
| TC (mg/dl) | 163.5 (141.5, 193.8) | 162.5 (137.5, 179.7) | 0.11 | 154.5 (134.5, 170.0) | 134.4 (116.9, 150.2) | 2.0 × 10− 4 | 147.0 (133.0, 162.0) | 139.2 (118.8, 153.6) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| LDL (mg/dl) | 76.1 (65.2, 96.6) | 101.6 (83.1, 118.3) | 1.0 × 10− 4 | 73.2 (64.0, 82.1) | 94.1 (80.2, 106.5) | 1.0 × 10− 4 | 75.0 (66.0, 83.5) | 81.2 (66.8, 98.0) | 9.0 × 10− 3 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | 61.0 (55.6, 68.3) | 56.6 (51.7, 66.2) | 0.23 | 53.7 (50.4, 59.2) | 53.4 (47.7, 59.0) | 0.16 | 55.0 (48.4, 59.8) | 46.3 (40.3, 53.2) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| TGL (mg/dl) | 91.0 (67.8, 131.8) | 55.0 (40.8, 71.8) | 1.0 × 10− 4 | 77.0 (61.0,103.5) | 60.0 (43.0, 83.1) | 6.0 × 10− 3 | 83.0 (59.0, 108.0) | 60.0 (46.2, 83.6) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| GL (mg/dl) | 89.9 (85.3, 93.3) | 84.4 (79.8, 88.4) | 4.0 × 10−4 | 80.0 (73.3, 84.0) | 93.6 (88.2, 98.5) | 1.0 × 10− 4 | 90.0 (86.0, 95.0) | 84.9 (78.5, 89.8) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| Hb1AC (%) | 5.4 (5.5,5.7) | 5.4 (5.2, 5.7) | 0.45 | 5.6 (5.5,5.7) | 5.8 (5.6, 6.0) | 1.0 × 10−3 | 5.5 (5.4, 5.6) | 5.5 (5.2, 5.8) | 0.38 |
involvement
General characteristics and comparisons of the variables before and after treatment 2. Descriptive results from Mestizos ethnic group at baseline and after treatments (AT) comparison. Outcomes were BMI (Body mass index), TC (Total Cholesterol), LDL (Low Density Lipoprotein), HDL (High Density Lipoprotein), GL (Glucose), HbA1c (Glycosylated hemoglobin). m (median), IQR (Inter Quartile Range, Q1-Q3). T2 consisted on Physical Activity program, Health education program, Parent involvement and Nutrition program
| Treatment 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mestizos | |||
| Variables | Baseline m (IQR)) | AT m (IQR) | p-value |
| BMI (km/m2) | 20.4 (16.8, 23.6) | 21.1 (16.5, 23.7) | 0.75 |
| BMI z-score | 0.07 (−0.5,0.6) | 0.12 (− 0.6,0.5) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| TC (mg/dl) | 171.5 (157.0, 193.5) | 137.0 (121.2, 159.1) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| LDL (mg/dl) | 90.0 (78.5, 104.5) | 91.9 (78.2, 103.1) | 0.25 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | 68.0 (60.0, 77.3) | 54.6 (48.3, 63.9) | 1.0 × 10−4 |
| TGL (mg/dl) | 91.0 (74.8, 133.0) | 65.0 (50.0, 87.4) | 1.0 × 10− 4 |
| GL (mg/dl) | 94.5 (87.0, 104.0) | 81.8 (74.6, 86.9) | 1.0 × 10−4 |
| Hb1AC (%) | 5.4 (5.3,5.5) | 5.5 (5.2, 5.6) | 0.14 |
Association results. Estimates (β),p-values and statistical power in percentage (Power %) for the minimum effect size (β) from the Generalized linear model of the effects of predictive variables, and the interaction between, them on the outcome differences between baseline and after intervention measurements: BMI (Body Mass Index), TC (Total Cholesterol), LDL (Low Density Lipoprotein), HDL (High Density Lipoprotein), GL (Glucose) Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). The explanatory variables were age, sex, ethnic group (Mestizos, Seris, Yaquis), and nutritional status (Normal weight, Overweight+Obesity)
| Predictive Variables | β | P-value | Power (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Difference inBMI | |||
| Intercept | −0.35 | 0.13 | |
| Girls | − 0.15 | 0.09 | |
| Age | 0.06 | 0.04 | |
| Seris | −0.57 | 0.42 | |
| Yaquis | 1.51 | 1 × 10−4 | |
| Overweight-Obesity | −0.22 | 0.02 | |
| Age*Seris | 0.04 | 0.59 | 73 |
| Age*Yaquis | −0.10 | 0.02 | |
| Difference in TC | |||
| Intercept | 0.09 | 0.99 | |
| Girls | −16.86 | 2.2 × 10−4 | |
| Seris | 21.98 | 0.38 | |
| Yaquis | −30.39 | 0.02 | |
| Age | −2.10 | 0.03 | 100 |
| Girls*Seris | 5.57 | 0.56 | |
| Girls*Yaquis | 16.60 | 0.02 | |
| Age*Seris | −1.92 | 0.46 | |
| Age*Yaquis | 4.21 | 0.01 | |
| Difference in LDL | |||
| Intercept | 5.03 | 0.02 | |
| Seris | 13.27 | 1.0 × 10−4 | |
| Yaquis | 2.22 | 0.34 | 100 |
| Overweight-Obesity | 5.27 | 0.02 | |
| Girls | −4.09 | 0.05 | |
| Difference in HDL | |||
| Intercept | −6.14 | 6.6 × 10−8 | |
| Girls | −4.03 | 0.01 | |
| Boys*Seris | 5.94 | 0.01 | |
| Girls*Seris | 8.21 | 2.6 × 10−4 | |
| Boys*Yaquis | −2.60 | 0.11 | 100 |
| Girls*Yaquis | 2.60 | 0.13 | |
| Difference inTGL | |||
| Intercept | −34.50 | 2.0 × 10−16 | |
| Seris | 20.39 | 3.0 × 10−3 | |
| Yaquis | 18.95 | 1.7 × 10−4 | |
| Overweight-Obesity | −9.99 | 0.03 | 100 |
| Difference in GL | |||
| Intercept | −12.30 | 2.0 × 10− 16 | |
| EtniaSeris | 26.90 | 2.0 × 10− 16 | |
| EtniaYaquis | 5.80 | 3.8 × 10−05 | 100 |
| Difference in HbA1C | |||
| Intercept | 0.03 | 0.19 | |
| EtniaSeris | 0.10 | 4.0 × 10−3 | 99 |
| EtniaYaquis | 0.01 | 0.72 | |
Effect of Treatment 2 in Mestizos ethnic group. Estimates (β), p-values and statistical power in percentage (Power %) for the minimum effect size (β) from the Generalized linear model. Differences between outcomes analysed at baseline and after intervention: BMI (Body mass index), TC (Total Cholesterol), LDL (Low Density Lipoprotein), HDL (High Density Lipoprotein), GL (Glucose) Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). The explanatory variable was treatment 2
| Outcomes | Variables | β | P-value | Power % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Difference in BMI | Intercept | 0.09 | 0.44 | |
| T2 | −0.25 | 0.08 | 99 | |
| Difference in TC | Intercept | −7.50 | 0.10 | |
| T2 | −24.12 | 1.2 × 10−05 | 100 | |
| Difference in HDL | Intercept | −1.90 | 0.24 | |
| T2 | −8.72 | 6.8 × 10−06 | 100 | |
| Difference in LDL | Intercept | 21.81 | 1.1 × 10−9 | |
| T2 | −22.24 | 1.6 × 10−09 | 100 | |
| Difference in TG | Intercept | −45.22 | 1.7 × 10−10 | |
| T2 | 7.99 | 0.30 | 80 | |
| Difference in GL | Intercept | −5.72 | 1.6 × 10−3 | |
| T2 | −9.23 | 1.6 × 10−05 | 100 | |
| Difference in HbA1C | Intercept | −0.03 | 0.46 | |
| T2 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 93 |