4.6 Article

Association of metabolic syndrome with depression and anxiety in Japanese men

期刊

DIABETES & METABOLISM
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 32-36

出版社

MASSON EDITEUR
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabet.2008.06.006

关键词

Anxiety; Depression; Japan; Metabolic syndrome; Workers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim. - The evidence is conflicting as to whether or not metabolic syndrome (MetS) is associated with depression and anxiety. For this reason, we have investigated the association of MetS with depression and anxiety in Japanese men. Methods. - MetS was defined as in the new (2006) criteria of the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), and depression and anxiety were assessed using the Profile of mood states (POMS), in 1215 male Japanese workers. The relationship between MetS and these mental conditions was assessed by logistic-regression analysis after controlling for age, gender, obesity, medical history (cardiovascular disease and diabetes), lifestyle habits (smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise and sleep) and work situation. Trend analyses for a positive association between MetS components and depression and anxiety were also performed. Results. - A total of 148 (12.2%), 92 (7.6%) and 170 (14.0%) patients were diagnosed with MetS, depression and anxiety, respectively. MetS was significantly related to depression, and waist circumference contributed significantly to the relationship. Trend analysis of the number of positive MetS components and depression showed a positive trend that was of borderline significance (P-trend = 0.06). No relationship was found between MetS and anxiety. Trend analysis of the number of positive MetS components and anxiety failed to show it clear trend (P-trend = 0.57). Conclusion. - A positive relationship was found between MetS and depression, but not between MetS and anxiety. in male Japanese workers. The specific factors comprising MetS, such as waist circumference, may be a reflection of the depression. (C) 2008 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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