| Literature DB >> 33987142 |
Fatemeh Dehghani Firouzabadi1, Ahmad Jayedi1, Elaheh Asgari1, Mena Farazi1, Zahra Noruzi1, Kurosh Djafarian2, Sakineh Shab-Bidar1.
Abstract
In this study, we assessed the association between the dietary phytochemical index (DPI) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) among adults in a cross-sectional study. We enrolled 850 adult men and women aged 18-65 years who had been referred to health centers in Tehran, Iran. The DPI was calculated based on 8 components including fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grains, soy products, nuts, seeds, olive, and olive oil. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the MetS across quartiles of the DPI were calculated using the logistic regression analysis, adjusting for age, energy intake, marital status, education status, occupation, smoking status, physical activity, and body mass index. The mean age of participants was 44.7 ± 10.7, of whom 69% were women. The prevalence of MetS was 30.5%. The mean score of DPI in women and men was 36.2 ± 26.8 and 33.7 ± 24.7, respectively. There was no significant association between DPI and odds of MetS in men (ORfourth vs. first quartile,1.57; 95% CI, 0.64-3.84) and women (ORfourth vs. first quartile, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.50-1.49) in the fully adjusted model. There was an inverse association between DPI and increased risk of central obesity in women (ORfourth vs. first quartile, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.29-1.00; p trend = 0.03). There was no significant association between DPI and other components of the MetS in men and women. Finally, we observed no significant association between the DPI and the odds of MetS. However, the finding suggests that having a phytochemical-rich diet can be inversely associated with abdominal obesity.Entities:
Keywords: Adults; Diet; Iran; Metabolic syndrome; Phytochemicals; index
Year: 2021 PMID: 33987142 PMCID: PMC8093085 DOI: 10.7762/cnr.2021.10.2.161
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Nutr Res ISSN: 2287-3732
Sociodemographic characteristics of the study participants across quartiles of the DPI
| Characteristics | Q1 (n = 211) | Q2 (n = 211) | Q3 (n = 211) | Q4 (n = 211) | p value* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPI score | < 17.2 | 17.2–28.8 | 28.8–45.0 | > 45.0 | |
| Age (yr) | 44.9 ± 10.5 | 44.3 ± 11.0 | 45.1 ± 10.1 | 44.7 ± 11.2 | 0.98 |
| Weight (kg) | 74.3 ± 12.8 | 74.1 ± 15.7 | 72.4 ± 12.5 | 73.0 ± 12.9 | 0.17 |
| Gender (% men) | 37.4 | 31.3 | 24.6 | 31.8 | |
| Marital status (% married) | 82.9 | 82.0 | 82.5 | 76.8 | 0.33 |
| Smoking status (% current) | 4.7 | 4.7 | 6.2 | 5.2 | 0.90 |
| Occupation (% employed) | 31.8 | 25.1 | 24.6 | 20.9 | 0.28 |
| Physical activity (% moderate or heavy) | 38.4 | 38.4 | 36.5 | 33.2 | 0.60 |
| Education (% university graduated) | 38.4 | 35.1 | 31.8 | 31.3 | 0.38 |
Values are mean ± standard deviation for continuous variables and percent for categorical variables.
DPI, dietary phytochemical index; Q, quartile.
*The p values resulted from the analysis of one-way analysis of variance for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. †The p < 0.05 is significant.
Values of cardiometabolic risk factors of the study participants across quartiles of the dietary phytochemical index
| Variables | Q1 (n = 211) | Q2 (n = 211) | Q3 (n = 211) | Q4 (n = 211) | p value* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBP (mm Hg) | 120.0 ± 1.4 | 120.0 ± 1.4 | 119.0 ± 1.4 | 119.0 ± 1.4 | 0.90 |
| DBP (mm Hg) | 78.9 ± 0.9 | 79.0 ± 0.9 | 77.4 ± 0.9 | 77.8 ± 0.9 | 0.69 |
| FPG (mg/dL) | 108.0 ± 3.1 | 109.0 ± 3.0 | 108 ± 3.0 | 107.0 ± 3.1 | 0.96 |
| TG (mg/dL) | 146.1 ± 5.8 | 148.9 ± 5.6 | 144.2 ± 5.6 | 141.4 ± 5.7 | 0.76 |
| HDL (mg/dL) | 49.4 ± 0.7 | 49.1 ± 0.7 | 50.6 ± 0.7 | 50.1 ± 0.7 | 0.40 |
| WC (cm) | 93.7 ± 11.6 | 92.2 ± 13.3 | 91.6 ± 11.4 | 91.2 ± 13.4 | 0.55 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 28.5 ± 7.8 | 27.9 ± 5.0 | 27.6 ± 4.3 | 27.5 ± 4.7 | 0.42† |
Values are mean ± standard deviation.
SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; TG, triglyceride; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; WC, waist circumference; BMI, body mass index; Q, quartile.
*Obtained by ANCOVA, adjusted for age, gender, education status, Occupation status, marital status, physical activity, smoking status, energy intake, and BMI; †Put out the BMI from the analysis as confounder.
Dietary intake of the study participants across quartiles of the dietary phytochemical index
| Variables | Q1 (n = 211) | Q2 (n = 211) | Q3 (n = 211) | Q4 (n = 211) | p value* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy (kcal/day) | 3,563 ± 3,572 | 2,210 ± 796 | 2,346 ± 873 | 2,019 ± 859 | < 0.001† |
| Protein (g/day) | 111 ± 72.8 | 87.3 ± 34.0 | 82.2 ± 33.3 | 69.5 ± 28.6 | < 0.001 |
| Carbohydrate (g/day) | 545 ± 888 | 369 ± 130 | 350 ± 144 | 299 ± 120 | < 0.001 |
| Fat (g/day) | 109 ± 71.3 | 82.4 ± 35.7 | 76.9 ± 37.9 | 66.0 ± 42.7 | < 0.001 |
| SFA (g/day) | 32.7 ± 22.8 | 24.9 ± 13.0 | 23.0 ± 12.6 | 20.1 ± 16.4 | < 0.001 |
| PUFA (g/day) | 22.1 ± 18.4 | 17.3 ± 10.4 | 16.3 ± 9.45 | 13.8 ± 9.60 | < 0.001 |
| MUFA (g/day) | 33.6 ± 27.3 | 25.2 ± 12.3 | 22.8 ± 13.7 | 20.1 ± 12.9 | < 0.001 |
| Cholesterol (mg/day) | 280 ± 202 | 236 ± 172 | 212 ± 113 | 192 ± 126 | 0.002 |
| Fruit (g/day) | 153 ± 102 | 250 ± 170 | 375 ± 270 | 602 ± 459 | < 0.001 |
| Vegetable (g/day) | 145 ± 119 | 156 ± 90.6 | 217 ± 155 | 276 ± 202 | < 0.001 |
| Nuts (g/day) | 6.58 ± 8.86 | 9.53 ± 10.3 | 11.9 ± 13.7 | 29.2 ± 38.3 | < 0.001 |
| Legumes (g/day) | 34.7 ± 27.7 | 49.6 ± 42.2 | 56.0 ± 42.6 | 83.9 ± 107 | < 0.001 |
| Whole grains (g/day) | 26.3 ± 29.5 | 36.2 ± 42.8 | 52.2 ± 57.5 | 85.4 ± 97.0 | < 0.001 |
| Seeds (g/day) | 0.88 ± 2.37 | 1.19 ± 2.38 | 1.87 ± 5.11 | 4.18 ± 9.79 | < 0.001 |
| Olive oil (g/day) | 1.10 ± 3.13 | 1.51 ± 3.11 | 3.03 ± 7.37 | 8.09 ± 30.9 | < 0.001 |
| Soy sources (g/day) | 11.1 ± 12.5 | 15.4 ± 15.1 | 24.8 ± 38.8 | 22.6 ± 36.0 | < 0.001 |
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation.
SFA, saturated fatty acids; PUFA, poly unsaturated fatty acids; MUFA, mono unsaturated fatty acids; Q, quartile.
*Using analysis of covariance, adjusted for age, gender, physical activity, and energy intake. The p < 0.05 is significant; †Put out the energy intake from the analysis as confounder.
Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) of metabolic syndrome and its components across quartiles of the dietary phytochemical index in women
| Variable | Q1 (n = 132) | Q2 (n = 145) | Q3 (n = 159) | Q4 (n = 144) | p trend* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MetS (No.) | 59 | 72 | 59 | 59 | ||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.22 (0.76–1.95) | 0.73 (0.45–1.16) | 0.85 (0.53–1.8) | 0.18 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.30 (0.79–2.15) | 0.76 (0.46–1.56) | 0.92 (0.55–1.57) | 0.30 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.32 (0.78–2.20) | 0.73 (0.43–1.21) | 0.86 (0.50–1.49) | 0.17 | |
| Low HDL | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.08 (0.67–1.74) | 0.81 (0.51–1.30) | 0.87 (0.54–1.41) | 0.36 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.99 (0.60–1.63) | 0.75 (0.46–1.22) | 0.77 (0.46–1.30) | 0.19 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.97 (0.58–1.60) | 0.73 (0.45–1.20) | 0.76 (0.44–1.29) | 0.17 | |
| Central obesity | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.80 (0.49–1.31) | 0.70 (0.43–1.13) | 0.58 (0.36–0.94) | 0.02 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.80 (0.46–1.40) | 0.69 (0.40–1.19) | 0.57 (0.31–1.02) | 0.04 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.76 (0.43–1.35) | 0.63 (0.36–1.11) | 0.54 (0.29–1.00) | 0.03 | |
| Hyperglycemia | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.85 (0.53–1.37) | 0.76 (0.48–1.21) | 0.84 (0.52–1.35) | 0.41 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.84 (0.52–1.37) | 0.75 (0.49–1.21) | 0.83 (0.50–1.36) | 0.40 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.88 (0.53–1.46) | 0.71 (0.43–1.18) | 0.76 (0.45–1.28) | 0.22 | |
| Hypertriglyceridemia | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.91 (0.56–1.48) | 0.91 (0.56–1.46) | 0.89 (0.55–1.46) | 0.68 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.99 (0.59–1.64) | 0.99 (0.60–1.63) | 1.0 (0.59–1.71) | 0.97 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.00 (0.59–1.67) | 0.93 (0.56–1.54) | 0.95 (0.55–1.63) | 0.78 | |
| Hypertension | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.56 (0.95–2.57) | 0.93 (0.56–1.53) | 1.29 (0.78–2.13) | 0.82 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.96 (1.09–3.51) | 1.04 (0.58–1.86) | 1.54 (0.84–2.81) | 0.61 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.92 (1.06–3.49) | 0.99 (0.55–1.79) | 1.51 (0.81–2.81) | 0.70 | |
MetS, metabolic syndrome; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; Q, quartile.
*Obtained by logistic regression analysis. Model 1: Adjusted for age and energy intake. Model 2: Additionally adjusted for marital status, education status, occupation, physical activity, and smoking status.
Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) of metabolic syndrome and its components across quartiles of the dietary phytochemical index in men
| Variable | Q1 (n = 79) | Q2 (n = 66) | Q3 (n = 52) | Q4 (n = 67) | p trend* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MetS (No.) | 14 | 18 | 7 | 16 | ||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.74 (0.78–3.84) | 0.72 (0.27–1.93) | 1.48 (0.66–3.32) | 0.69 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 2.0 (0.83–4.56) | 0.79 (0.28–2.21) | 1.76 (0.74–4.19) | 0.48 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 2.13 (0.91–4.97) | 0.72 (0.25–2.07) | 1.57 (0.64–3.84) | 0.71 | |
| Low HDL | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.81 (0.77–4.29) | 0.80 (0.27–2.33) | 1.34 (0.55–3.29) | 0.86 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.90 (0.78–4.60) | 0.88 (0.29–2.63) | 1.47 (0.57–3.79) | 0.73 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.99 (0.79–4.96) | 0.86 (0.27–2.67) | 1.25 (0.47–3.36) | 0.99 | |
| Central obesity | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.89 (0.42–1.88) | 1.61 (0.76–3.40) | 0.95 (0.45–1.97) | 0.74 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.12 (0.51–2.42) | 1.99 (0.90–4.42) | 1.27 (0.57–2.80) | 0.33 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.15 (0.52–2.53) | 1.98 (0.87–4.47) | 1.21 (0.54–2.73) | 0.41 | |
| Hyperglycemia | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 1.15 (0.59–2.23) | 1.16 (0.57–2.36) | 1.19 (0.61–2.30) | 0.60 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.06 (0.53–2.09) | 1.06 (0.50–2.21) | 1.05 (0.52–2.21) | 0.89 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.10 (0.54–2.21) | 1.09 (0.51–2.34) | 1.02 (0.49–2.11) | 0.96 | |
| Hypertriglyceridemia | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.82 (0.42–1.60) | 0.48 (0.23–1.02) | 0.71 (0.36–1.38) | 0.16 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.78 (0.39–1.55) | 0.48 (0.22–1.05) | 0.68 (0.33–1.39) | 0.18 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.78 (0.39–1.55) | 0.49 (0.22–1.07) | 0.66 (0.32–1.36) | 0.16 | |
| Hypertension | ||||||
| Crude | 1.00 | 0.82 (0.42–1.63) | 0.82 (0.39–1.69) | 0.72 (0.36–1.43) | 0.36 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.0 (0.47–2.10) | 0.79 (0.35–2.77) | 0.84 (0.38–1.82) | 0.56 | |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.98 (0.46–2.09) | 0.74 (0.32–1.72) | 0.78 (0.35–1.72) | 0.45 | |
MetS, metabolic syndrome; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; Q, quartile.
*Obtained by logistic regression analysis. Model 1: Adjusted for age and energy intake. Model 2: Additionally adjusted for marital status, education status, occupation, physical activity, and smoking status.