4.3 Article

The associations of anthropometric measurements with subsequent gestational diabetes in Aboriginal women

Journal

OBESITY RESEARCH & CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages 499-506

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.orcp.2015.02.005

Keywords

Gestational diabetes; Waist circumference; Waist-to-height ratio; BMI; Aboriginal women

Funding

  1. NHMRC [APP1025350, APP1042343, 511081]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Problem: To evaluate the associations of different anthropometric measurements on earlier exam with subsequent gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Aboriginal women. Methods: This is a nested case-control study. Anthropometric measurements were conducted at baseline from 1992 to 1995 in a remote Aboriginal community. All subsequent pregnancies among the original participants were identified through review of hospital records of 20 years. Thirty-two women developed GDM and 99 women were hospitalised for pregnancy-related conditions other than GDM. The association between body mass index (BMI), weight, height, waist circumference, hip circumference, waist-to-hip ratio and waist-to-height ratio with subsequent GDM was examined. Results: Our results showed an increased risk of GDM with increase in one standard deviation of BMI (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.3, 3.1), weight (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.7), waist circumference (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.1, 3.0) and waist-to-height ratio (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.4, 3.9). High BMI (BMI >= 25 kg/m(2)) was associated with subsequent GDM (OR = 2.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 7.8). Conclusions: BMI and waist-to-height ratio are better predictors than other anthropometric indices of GDM in Aboriginal women. Given that these measures are associated with future GDM, interventions to reduce BMI, weight and waist circumference in young women need to be assessed for their potential to prevent GDM. (C) 2015 Asian Oceanian Association for the Study of Obesity. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available