4.7 Article

Beneficial effects of a Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension eating plan on features of the metabolic syndrome

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 28, 期 12, 页码 2823-2831

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.28.12.2823

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE - To determine the effects of a Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) eating plan on metabolic risks in patients with the metabolic syndrome. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - This was a randomized controlled ompatient trial conducted on 116 patients with the metabolic syndrome. Three diets were prescribed for 6 months: a control diet, a weight-reducing diet emphasizing healthy food choices, and the DASH diet with reduced calories and increased consumption of fruit, vegetables, low-fat dairy, and whole grains and lower in saturated fat, total fat, and cholesterol and restricted to 2,400 mg Na. The main outcome measures were the components of the metabolic syndrome. RESULTS - Relative to the control diet, the DASH diet resulted in higher HDL cholesterol (7 and 10 mg/dl), lower triglycerides (- 18 and - 14 mg/dl), systolic blood pressure (SBP) (- 12 and -11 mmHg), diastolic blood pressure (- 6 and - 7 mmHg), weight (- 16 and - 14 kg), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (- 15 and -8 mg/dl), and weight (- 16 and - 15 kg), among men and women, respectively (all P < 0.001). The net reduction in triglycerides (- 17 and - 18 mg/dl), SBP (-11 and -11 mmHg), diastolic blood pressure (- 5 and - 6 mmHg), and FBG (- 4 and - 6 mg/dl), weight (- 16 and - 15 kg), and increase in HDL (5 and 10 mg/dl) among men and women, respectively, was higher in the DASH group (all P < 0.05). The weight-reducing diet resulted in significant change in triglycerides (-13 and -10 mg/dl), SBP (- 6 and - 6 mmHg), and weight (- 13 and - 12 kg) among men and women, respectively (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS - The DASH diet can likely reduce most of the metabolic risks in both men and women; the related mechanisms need further study.

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

4.7
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