4 resultados para Tolerance test
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Insulin resistance is the pathophysiological key to explain metabolic syndrome. Although clearly useful, the Homeostasis Model Assessment index (an insulin resistance measurement) hasn't been systematically applied in clinical practice. One of the main reasons is the discrepancy in cut-off values reported in different populations. We sought to evaluate in a Portuguese population the ideal cut-off for Homeostasis Model Assessment index and assess its relationship with metabolic syndrome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We selected a cohort of individuals admitted electively in a Cardiology ward with a BMI < 25 Kg/m2 and no abnormalities in glucose metabolism (fasting plasma glucose < 100 mg/dL and no diabetes). The 90th percentile of the Homeostasis Model Assessment index distribution was used to obtain the ideal cut-off for insulin resistance. We also selected a validation cohort of 300 individuals (no exclusion criteria applied). RESULTS: From 7 000 individuals, and after the exclusion criteria, there were left 1 784 individuals. The 90th percentile for Homeostasis Model Assessment index was 2.33. In the validation cohort, applying that cut-off, we have 49.3% of individuals with insulin resistance. However, only 69.9% of the metabolic syndrome patients had insulin resistance according to that cut-off. By ROC curve analysis, the ideal cut-off for metabolic syndrome is 2.41. Homeostasis Model Assessment index correlated with BMI (r = 0.371, p < 0.001) and is an independent predictor of the presence of metabolic syndrome (OR 19.4, 95% CI 6.6 - 57.2, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Our study showed that in a Portuguese population of patients admitted electively in a Cardiology ward, 2.33 is the Homeostasis Model Assessment index cut-off for insulin resistance and 2.41 for metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSION: Homeostasis Model Assessment index is directly correlated with BMI and is an independent predictor of metabolic syndrome.
Resumo:
Background: Allergic rhinitis and asthma (ARA) are chronic inflammatory diseases of the airways that often coexist in children. The only tool to assess the ARA control, the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) is to be used by adults. We aimed to develop the Pediatric version of Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARATkids) and to test its comprehensibility in children with 4 to 12 years of age. Methods: The questionnaire development included a literature review of pediatric questionnaires on asthma and/or rhinitis control and two consensus meetings of a multidisciplinary group. Cognitive testing was carried out in a cross-sectional qualitative study using cognitive interviews. Results: Four questionnaires to assess asthma and none to assess rhinitis control in children were identified. The multidisciplinary group produced a questionnaire version for children with 17 questions with illustrations and dichotomous (yes/no) response format. The version for caregivers had 4-points and dichotomous scales. Twenty-nine children, 4 to 12 years old, and their caregivers were interviewed. Only children over 6 years old could adequately answer the questionnaire. A few words/expressions were not fully understood by children of 6 to 8 years old. The drawings illustrating the questions were considered helpful by children and caregivers. Caregivers considered the questionnaire complete and clear and preferred dichotomous over the 4-points scales. The proportion of agreement between children and their caregivers was 61%. The words/expressions that were difficult to understand were amended. Conclusion: CARATkids, the first questionnaire to assess a child’s asthma and rhinitis control was developed and its content validity was assured. Cognitive testing showed that CARATKids is well-understood by children 6 to 12 years old. The questionnaire’s measurement properties can now be assessed in a validation study.
