Evaluation and Comparison of Daily Total Energy Intake and Macronutrient Proportion Consumption Between Poor vs Good Glycemic Control Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients: A cross-sectional study at Family Medicine OPD, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Thailand

Achiraya Ruangchaisiwawet, Narumit Bankhum, Krittai Tanasombatkul, N. Yingchankul
{"title":"Evaluation and Comparison of Daily Total Energy Intake and Macronutrient Proportion Consumption Between Poor vs Good Glycemic Control Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients: A cross-sectional study at Family Medicine OPD, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Thailand","authors":"Achiraya Ruangchaisiwawet, Narumit Bankhum, Krittai Tanasombatkul, N. Yingchankul","doi":"10.12982/bscm.2023.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare daily total energy intake and macronutrient proportion consumption between poor and good glycemic control type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2021 to March 2022 at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital. Patient data was collected using a questionnaire. Dietary intake data was collected using 24-hour dietary recall and was analyzed by a dietitian. Factors and their association with poor glycemic control were analyzed. RESULTS Of the 127 participants, 40.16% had poor glycemic control. The mean HbA1c level in the poor and the good glycemic control group was 7.67±0.61% and 6.39±0.44% respectively (p < 0.001). Among all patients, the mean total energy intake was 1,640.21±495.92 kcal/day, with mean proportions of 51.25% for carbohydrate, 16.56% for protein, and 32.12% for fat. There were no significant differences between the poor and good glycemic control groups in total energy intake (1702.63±503.48 kcal/day vs. 1598.32±489.65 kcal/day, p = 0.247), carbohydrate intake (222.78±89.98 g/day vs. 203.72±79.36 g/day, p = 0.211), protein intake (70.12±21.50 g/day vs. 65.44±21.38 g/day, p = 0.230), or fat intake (58.94±19.26 g/day vs. 57.86±24.33 g/day, p = 0.790). CONCLUSIONS The poor glycemic control group was more likely to consume more total energy and a higher proportion of carbohydrate and fat, which suggests that proper individualized dietary energy intake and diet proportions may enhance nutritional status and glycemic control. KEYWORDS DM, nutrition, diet, calories, glycemic control, consumption","PeriodicalId":405540,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical Sciences and Clinical Medicine","volume":"74 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical Sciences and Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12982/bscm.2023.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare daily total energy intake and macronutrient proportion consumption between poor and good glycemic control type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2021 to March 2022 at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital. Patient data was collected using a questionnaire. Dietary intake data was collected using 24-hour dietary recall and was analyzed by a dietitian. Factors and their association with poor glycemic control were analyzed. RESULTS Of the 127 participants, 40.16% had poor glycemic control. The mean HbA1c level in the poor and the good glycemic control group was 7.67±0.61% and 6.39±0.44% respectively (p < 0.001). Among all patients, the mean total energy intake was 1,640.21±495.92 kcal/day, with mean proportions of 51.25% for carbohydrate, 16.56% for protein, and 32.12% for fat. There were no significant differences between the poor and good glycemic control groups in total energy intake (1702.63±503.48 kcal/day vs. 1598.32±489.65 kcal/day, p = 0.247), carbohydrate intake (222.78±89.98 g/day vs. 203.72±79.36 g/day, p = 0.211), protein intake (70.12±21.50 g/day vs. 65.44±21.38 g/day, p = 0.230), or fat intake (58.94±19.26 g/day vs. 57.86±24.33 g/day, p = 0.790). CONCLUSIONS The poor glycemic control group was more likely to consume more total energy and a higher proportion of carbohydrate and fat, which suggests that proper individualized dietary energy intake and diet proportions may enhance nutritional status and glycemic control. KEYWORDS DM, nutrition, diet, calories, glycemic control, consumption
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
血糖控制不良与血糖控制良好的 2 型糖尿病患者每日总能量摄入和宏量营养素比例消耗的评估与比较:泰国清迈 Maharaj Nakorn 医院家庭医学手术室横断面研究
目的 评估和比较血糖控制不良和血糖控制良好的 2 型糖尿病患者的每日总能量摄入量和宏量营养素消耗比例。方法 2021 年 12 月至 2022 年 3 月在 Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai 医院进行了一项横断面研究。患者数据通过问卷调查收集。饮食摄入数据通过 24 小时饮食回忆收集,并由营养师进行分析。分析了血糖控制不佳的因素及其关联。结果 127 名参与者中,40.16% 的人血糖控制不佳。血糖控制不良组和血糖控制良好组的平均 HbA1c 水平分别为 7.67±0.61% 和 6.39±0.44%(P < 0.001)。所有患者的平均总能量摄入量为(1640.21±495.92)千卡/天,其中碳水化合物、蛋白质和脂肪的平均比例分别为(51.25%)、(16.56%)和(32.12%)。血糖控制不良组和血糖控制良好组在总能量摄入(1702.63±503.48 千卡/天 vs. 1598.32±489.65 千卡/天,P = 0.247)、碳水化合物摄入(222.78±89.98 克/天 vs. 203.72±79.36 克/天,P = 0.211)、蛋白质摄入量(70.12±21.50 克/天 vs. 65.44±21.38 克/天,P = 0.230)或脂肪摄入量(58.94±19.26 克/天 vs. 57.86±24.33 克/天,P = 0.790)。结论 血糖控制不佳组更有可能摄入更多的总能量以及更高的碳水化合物和脂肪比例,这表明适当的个体化膳食能量摄入和膳食比例可改善营养状况和血糖控制。关键词:糖尿病,营养,饮食,热量,血糖控制,消耗
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fetal Anemia in Northern Thailand: Etiologies and Outcomes Estimation of Post-mortem Interval Based on Livor Mortis using a Colorimeter in Thai Populations Knowledge and Awareness of Human Papillomavirus Infection and Vaccination in Thai Male Youth, Including Men Who Have Sex With Men Assessment of Second Trimester Genetic Amniocentesis: A Review of 6 Years of Experience at Sanpatong Hospital, A Mid-level Secondary Hospital Setting Exploring Synergies of Lotus Seed Extract-Hyaluronic Acid Gel for Enhanced Local Drug Delivery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1