4.4 Article

Associations between eating habits and glycemic control and obesity in Japanese workers with type 2 diabetes mellitus

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/DMSO.S176749

关键词

type 2 diabetes; workers; eating habits; glycemic control; obesity

资金

  1. Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To investigate the impact of poor eating habits on glycemic and metabolic control, we analyzed the associations between eating behaviors and HbA1c and body mass index (BMI) in Japanese workers with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Subjects and methods: The Japan Medical Data Center database of workers' medical health insurance claims was used to identify individuals with T2DM who were receiving antidiabetic medication between April 2012 and March 2015 (the primary analysis population). The database included routine medical check-up results and responses to questions on lifestyle and eating habits. Using these, we retrospectively analyzed the associations between the individuals' eating habits and their HbAlc levels and BMIs. Results: In total, 31,722 individuals were included in the primary analysis. The mean values of HbA1c and BMI were 7.27% and 26.29 kg/m(2), respectively; these tended to be higher among the younger population. Approximately 36% of the individuals regularly ate supper within 2 hours of bedtime, 14.5% regularly consumed late-night snacks, and 13.4% regularly skipped breakfast. Each of these eating habits correlated significantly with higher HbA1c and BMI. In addition, the population with two or all three of these poor dietary habits showed the highest association with HbA1c >= 7.0% and BMI >= 25 kg/m(2). Approximately 38% of workers ate fast. Fast eating was significantly associated with BMI >= 25 kg/m(2) but not with HbA1c >= 7.0%. Conclusion: Poor eating habits were significantly associated with poor glycemic and body weight control in Japanese workers with T2DM. Improved eating habits may help with glycemic and body weight management.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据