- Association of Educational Level and Socioeconomic Status with Glucose Metabolism.
-
Young Sil Eom, Sun Mee Yang, Pyung Chun Oh, Jung Hyun Lee, Ki Young Lee, Yeun Sun Kim, Sihoon Lee, Jung Soo Im, Jun Yim, Dae Kyu Oh, Moon Suk Nam, Ie Byung Park
-
Korean Diabetes J. 2008;32(4):377-385. Published online August 1, 2008
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4093/kdj.2008.32.4.377
-
-
2,574
View
-
34
Download
-
1
Crossref
-
Abstract
PDF
- BACKGROUND
The objective of the present study was to examine the association of educational level and socioeconomic status with glucose metabolism including prediabetes. METHODS: This cross-sectional study subjects were 882 (mean age: 51.0 +/- 13.4 years, M:F = 241:641) without diabetes, aged more than 20 years and residing in Whasu 2 dong in Incheon. We classified them into three levels according to their educational level: primary (illiterate or up to elementary school), secondary (middle school or high school) and tertiary (university), and into three levels according to their socioeconomic status by self reported questionnaire: low, middle and high. Subjects were diagnosed as three groups (normal, prediabetes and diabetes) by American Diabetes Association criteria using 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. The association of educational level and socioeconomic status with glucose metabolism was analyzed. RESULTS: The number of normal group was 300 (34.0%), that of prediabetes was 470 (53.3%) and that of diabetes was 112 (12.7%). In women, the proportion of primary educational group was larger than that of secondary educational group in diabetes (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-3.51) and larger than that of tertiary educational group in prediabetes ([OR] = 2.00; [CI]: 1.06-3.78). But socioeconomic status did not have the statistical association with glucose metabolism in women. Also both educational level and socioeconomic status had no statistical association with glucose metabolism in men. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of low educational level is larger in prediabetes and diabetes compared with normal group in women.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- How do life-course trajectories of socioeconomic position affect quality of life in patients with diabetes mellitus?
Hye Ah Lee, Ko Eun Lee, Yool Won Jeong, Jaeseon Ryu, Minkyung Kim, Jung Won Min, Young Sun Hong, Kyunghee Jung-Choi, Hyesook Park Quality of Life Research.2014; 23(4): 1337. CrossRef
- Inflammatory Markers are Associated with Microvascular Complications in Type 2 Diabetes.
-
Sun Mee Yang, Sung Yong Kim, Ki Young Lee, Yeun Sun Kim, Moon Suk Nam, Ie Byung Park
-
Korean Diabetes J. 2007;31(6):472-479. Published online November 1, 2007
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4093/jkda.2007.31.6.472
-
-
2,483
View
-
39
Download
-
1
Crossref
-
Abstract
PDF
- BACKGROUND
Inflammatory markers are known to be sensitive predictors of atherosclerotic disease such as coronary heart disease. Diabetic patients have higher level of inflammatory markers such as fibrinogen, high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) or IL-6. We investigated the association of inflammatory markers with microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We studied cross-sectionally 244 consecutive patients with type 2 diabetes without macrovascular disease such as cerebral infarct, coronary heart disease and peripheral arterial disease. The urinary albumin/creatinine ratio was determined in a morning, untimed, urine specimen. Ophthalmoscopic examinations were performed to evaluate diabetic retinopathy. Diabetic neuropathy was examined by 10-g monofilament, Neuropathic Disability Score and Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument. RESULTS: 47 patients (23.5%) had diabetic retinopathy, 81 (34.6%) had nephropathy and 132 (54.2%) had neuropathy. Fibrinogen and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were significantly higher in the patients with nephropathy, retinopathy and neuropathy than in those without (P = 0.009, 0.003 and 0.047; P = 0.011, 0.02 and 0.006 , respectively). There were no differences in the hsCRP and IL-6 level between in patients with microvascular complications and in those without. Inflammatory parameters were correlated with each other. The hsCRP was correlated with IL-6 (r = 0.40, P < 0.001) and fibrinogen (r = 0.45, P < 0.001), but fibrinogen was not significantly correlated with IL-6 (r = 0.13, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Although IL-6, hsCRP and fibrinogen may be associated with microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes, we show that fibrinogen is a strong marker of microvascular complications.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- Hesperetin suppresses LPS/high glucose-induced inflammatory responses via TLR/MyD88/NF-κB signaling pathways in THP-1 cells
Aeri Lee, HyunJi Gu, Min-Hee Gwon, Jung-Mi Yun Nutrition Research and Practice.2021; 15(5): 591. CrossRef
- Effects of Rosiglitazone on Body Fat Mass and Distribution in Type 2 Diabetic Patients.
-
Hong Kyu Kim, Hyo Joong Yoon, Seung Min You, Ki Young Lee, Hye Young Park, Moon Ho Kang
-
Korean Diabetes J. 2003;27(3):272-279. Published online June 1, 2003
-
-
-
Abstract
PDF
- BACKGROUND
Rosiglitazone, an insulin-sensitizing drug of the thiazolidinediones class, has a high affinity for the ligands of the peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-gamma(PPAR-gamma), is highly expressed in adipose tissue, and plays an important role in the differentiation of adipocyte. The influence of rosiglitazone was investigated on the total fat mass and regional adiposity in type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS: Rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) was administered for 6 months to type 2 diabetic patients (n=20) whose glycemic control was unacceptable with the use of other treatments. Measurements of the total, trunk and leg region body fats (by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) and abdominal fat distributions (by computed tomography) were compared before and after treatment. RESULTS: Nine patients received rosiglitazone monotherapy and 11 a combined therapy of sulfonylurea and/or metformin. The HbA1C, serum insulin level and homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index were decreased following the rosiglitazone therapy, but the body weight and BMI were increased. As for the body fat changes, the total (19,382+/-4,786 vs. 22,940+/- 7,300 g, p<0.01), trunk (11,399+/- 2,678 vs. 13,960+/-4,698 g, p<0.01) and leg (4,734+/-1,319 vs. 6,203+/-2,231g, p<0.05) region fat masses were significantly increased. The percentage increase in the total, trunk and leg region fat masses were 20+/-25, 25+/-35 and 58+/-130%, respectively. As for abdominal fat distribution after the treatment, the visceral fat area (225+/-84 vs. 187+/-87 cm2, p<0.05) was significantly decreased, while the subcutaneous fat area tended to increase (178+/-83 vs. 201+/-80 cm2, NS), although these were not statistically significant. The visceral/subcutaneous fat ratio (V/S ratio) was significantly decreased (1.45+/- 0.64 vs. 0.95+/-0.25, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Although the total body fat mass was increased following the rosiglitazone therapy, a shift in the body fat distribution, from the visceral to the subcutaneous region, was observed, which may be associated with an improvement in insulin resistance. However, a long-term assessment of the consequences of an increasing total fat mass and change in the body fat distribution will be required.
|